MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4211004328 · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-72192-3_3

Defect Types

2021· book-chapter· en· W4211004328 on OpenAlexaff
Nadimul Haque Faisal, Ömer Necati Cora, Muhammed Latif Bekçi, R. E. Śliwa, Y. Sternberg, Shashank Pant, Richard Degenhardt, Anil Prathuru

Bibliographic record

VenueSpringer aerospace technology · 2021
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Welding Techniques Analysis
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStructural integrityStructural health monitoringWeldingStructural engineeringMaterials scienceEngineeringForensic engineeringComputer scienceMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This chapter provides an overview of the common types of defects found in various structural materials and joints in aircraft. Materials manufacturing methods (including large-scale production) have been established in the aircraft industry. However, as will be seen in this chapter, manufacturing defects and defects during in-service conditions are very common across all material types. The structural material types include metals, composites, coatings, adhesively bonded and stir-welded joints. This chapter describes the defect types as a baseline for the description of their detection with the methods of Chap. 10.1007/978-3-030-72192-3_5 to 10.1007/978-3-030-72192-3_8 . Based on the understanding of the defect types, there is great expectation for a technical breakthrough for the application of structural health monitoring (SHM) damage detection systems, where continuous monitoring and assessment with high throughput and yield will produce the desired structural integrity.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.179
Threshold uncertainty score0.599

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1790.117

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpringer aerospace technologySame topicAdvanced Welding Techniques AnalysisFrench-language works237,207