MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4246993731 · doi:10.21611/qirt.2019.044

Application of Sparse Non-Negative Matrix Factorization in infrared non-destructive testing

2019· article· en· W4246993731 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Measurement and Detection Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMatrix decompositionSparse matrixInfraredMatrix (chemical analysis)Computer scienceFactorizationNon-negative matrix factorizationAlgorithmMaterials sciencePhysicsOpticsComputational chemistryChemistryComposite materialEigenvalues and eigenvectors

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Non-negative matrix factorization (NMF) solves the problem of negative basis in principal component analysis (PCA) and widely used in diverse applications in different fields. Here, we show an application of sparse-NMF in infrared non-destructive testing (IR-NDT) imaging. We applied Sparse-NMF to determine the subsurface defects of an Aluminium plate specimen applying active thermographic method. To obtain results we compared the ability of Sparse-NMF to detect subsurface defects and its computational load in compared to state-of-the-art thermographic approaches such as: principal component analysis/thermography (PCT), Candid Covariance-Free Incremental Principal Component Thermography (CCIPCT), Sparse PCT, non-negative matrix factorization (NMF), and standard NMF with gradient descend (GD) and nonnegative least square (NNLS). The results show considerable performance (93%-39.52s) for Sparse-NMF, which conclusively indicate the promising performance as a confirmation for the outlined properties.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.553
Threshold uncertainty score0.365

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.252 · 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