MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4249892566 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14645934

Spatial data analysis for laser scanning based shape error inspection

2021· preprint· en· W4249892566 on OpenAlexaff
Haibin Jia

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIndustrial Vision Systems and Defect Detection
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLaser scanningFast Fourier transformScannerStructured-light 3D scannerComputer scienceFourier transformDiscrete Fourier transform (general)Projection (relational algebra)Spatial frequencyData processingArtificial intelligenceComputer visionOpticsLaserFourier analysisAlgorithmMathematicsShort-time Fourier transformPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Laser scanning, a widely used technology, has been highly developed and adopted in various industrial applications. The methodologies used for scanner date processing are mostly point based. In this thesis, a new approach is presented to analyze spatial data obtained from a 3-D laser scanner for shape error inspection. Different from traditional methodologies, the method proposed in this research is frequency based. The method utilizes the Fourier transform to decompose a 2-D curve or 3-D shape into its spatial components by applying two 1-D FFT (Fast Fourier Transform) on 2-D curves or two 2-D FFT on 3-D shapes. The spatial components including frequency, amplitude, and phase are defined as shape characteristics to represent the shape under inspection. By relating spatial components with GD&T (Geometric Dimensioning and Tolerancing) standards using proper analysis techniques, such as frequency spectrum and cross correlation, shape errors can be detected and characterized. One of the applications of this method is automated inspection. In this research, the spatial data method is applied to MIG (Metal Inert Gas) weld inspection. Experiments are carried out to analyze the 2-D curve of a projection weld data, and the 3-D scanning data directly. A MIG weld inspection system is also developed for production use.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIndustrial Vision Systems and Defect DetectionFrench-language works237,207