A data-driven method for predicting structural degradation using a piezoceramic array
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is a growing use of carbon fiber reinforced polymers (CFRPs) in modern airframes with still a limited understanding of the in-service behavioral characteristics of these structures.Structural Health Monitoring (SHM) technologies that use surface-bonded piezoceramic (PZT) transducers to generate and measure guided waves within these structures have demonstrated promising damage detection and localization results and potential for data gathering in data-driven damage prognosis. This paper investigates the development of a data-driven SHM based damage prognosis system for estimating remaining useful life (RUL) of CFRP coupons following damage initiation. A robust and realistic laboratory data gathering methodology is introduced as a building block for evaluating the feasibility of data-driven damage prognosis for in-service aerospace structures. Data are gathered using a PZT-based SHM system. Using the gathered raw guided wave signals, a number of time and frequency domain features are first extracted which are derived from existing damage imaging and detection algorithms. Then, using various combinations of the feature sets as inputs to generic data mining algorithms, the paper presents estimates of the predicted RUL against actual damage diameter progression.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".