MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4244063911 · doi:10.21611/qirt.2010.102

Region of Interest Extraction based on Multi–resolution Analysis for Infrared Nondestructive Testing

2010· article· en· W4244063911 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the 2010 International Conference on Quantitative InfraRed Thermography · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIndustrial Vision Systems and Defect Detection
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDepartamento Administrativo de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación (COLCIENCIAS)
KeywordsNondestructive testingExtraction (chemistry)Resolution (logic)InfraredComputer scienceMaterials scienceArtificial intelligenceOpticsPhysicsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, a methodology for ROI extraction in INDT using multi-resolution analysis is proposed. Complementary, both local procedures Harris operator and gradient direction are used. The proposed methodology is tested using three CFRP specimens having complex shapes and defects at different depths. Besides, another two specimens are considered, which are made of PlexiglasTM and aluminum with circular flat bottom holes at different depths. The results show that the proposed methodology is invariant to the material or defect shape among considered plates, moreover the methodology only has two parameters with no dependency of the variable features of the inspected object.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.755
Threshold uncertainty score0.689

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.130
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.185 · 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