MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312281621 · doi:10.1115/msec2022-85334

A Deterministic Inspection of Surface Preparation for Metalization

2022· article· en· W4312281621 on OpenAlexaff
Shiva Shokri, Pooria Sedigh, Mehdi Hojjati, Tsz-Ho Kwok

Bibliographic record

VenueVolume 1: Additive Manufacturing; Biomanufacturing; Life Cycle Engineering; Manufacturing Equipment and Automation; Nano/Micro/Meso Manufacturing · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIndustrial Vision Systems and Defect Detection
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHistogramThresholdingCoatingComputer scienceComposite numberMaterials scienceArtificial intelligenceComputer visionComposite materialImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract To improve the surface properties of fiber-reinforced polymer composites, one method is to employ thermal spray to apply a coating on the composite. For this purpose, it uses a metal mesh serving as an anchor between the composite and the coating to increase adhesion. However, the composite manufacturing covers the metal mesh with resin, and getting an acceptable coating is only possible through an optimum exposure of the metal mesh by sand blasting prior to coating. Therefore, this study aims to develop a computer vision and image processing method to inspect the parts and provide the operator with feedback. Initially, this approach takes the images from a single-view microscope as the inputs, and then it classifies the images into two regions of resin and metal mesh using the Otsu’s adaptive thresholding. Next, it segments the resin areas into distinct connected clusters, and it makes a histogram based on the clusters’ size. Finally, the distribution of the histogram can determine the status of the surface preparation. The state-of-the-art has only examined the sand-blasted composites manually, requiring expertise and experience. This research presents a deterministic method to automate the inspection process efficiently with an inexpensive portable digital microscope. This method is practical, especially when there is a lack of standardized data for machine learning. The experimental results show that the method can get different histograms for various samples, and it can distinguish whether a sample is under-blasted, proper-blasted, or over-blasted successfully. This study also has applications to various fields of manufacturing for defect detection and closed-loop control.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.827
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.207 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVolume 1: Additive Manufacturing; Biomanufacturing; Life Cycle Engineering; Manufacturing Equipment and Automation; Nano/Micro/Meso ManufacturingSame topicIndustrial Vision Systems and Defect DetectionFrench-language works237,207