MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206835576 · doi:10.1038/s41598-021-03840-5

Field deployable impedance-based corrosion sensor

2022· article· en· W4206835576 on OpenAlexafffund
Jiajun Li, Xiaoxue Jiang, Faheem Khan, Xuanjie Ye, Shuren Wang, Jie Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCorrosion Behavior and Inhibition
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersMitacs
KeywordsCorrosionDielectric spectroscopyElectrical impedanceMaterials scienceTest benchCorrosion monitoringEquivalent circuitComputer scienceElectrochemistryMetallurgyElectrodeElectrical engineeringEngineeringChemistryEmbedded systemVoltage

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) has been used in various applications, such as metal corrosion monitoring. However, many conventional corrosion monitoring setups are bulky and inconvenient for in-situ testing. The purpose of this work is to reduce the size of the whole corrosion monitoring system. We utilized EIS to design a field deployable impedance-based corrosion sensor (FDICS), capable of performing in-situ EIS analysis. Experiments verified the sensor's accuracy, and the results showed that the sensor performed similarly to a bench-top EIS machine when we tested on circuit models. Furthermore, we used the proposed FDICS to monitor a metal corrosion experiment and performed EIS. The result showed that the proposed FDICS is able to obtain the sample's impedance spectroscopy, which could help researchers test its corrosion severity on a metallic sample in-situ. Compared to other bulky conventional setups, our device eliminates the design complexity while still showing insights into the corrosion reaction.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.234 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicCorrosion Behavior and InhibitionFrench-language works237,207