MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4318480157 · doi:10.1063/9.0000451

Classification and characterization of coexisting defects from magnetic flux leakage data using deep learning method

2023· article· en· W4318480157 on OpenAlexaff
Guanyu Piao, Jiatong Ling, Jiaoyang Li

Bibliographic record

VenueAIP Advances · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNon-Destructive Testing Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMagnetic flux leakageDeep learningConvolutional neural networkNondestructive testingFerromagnetismArtificial intelligenceMaterials scienceFinite element methodComputer scienceCharacterization (materials science)Leakage (economics)Artificial neural networkPipeline transportMachine learningStructural engineeringEngineeringMechanical engineeringMagnetCondensed matter physicsPhysicsNanotechnology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ferromagnetic materials are widely used in infrastructure, such as steam generators, storage tanks, and gas pipelines. During their service time, ferromagnetic materials are subject to deterioration and defects are prone to generate which could damage infrastructures and cause catastrophic accidents. Magnetic flux leakage (MFL) is one of the widely used nondestructive evaluation (NDE) methods to detect and characterize defects in ferromagnetic materials to ensure infrastructure safety. However, many research works have been carried out on the modeling, classification, and characterization of a single defect, while the scenario of coexisting defects is ignored. In practical field, the coexistence of surface and subsurface defects within an overlapping area can cause much earlier than expected deterioration or even penetration, the result of which is more damaging. Here, we propose a convolutional neural network (CNN) based deep learning method to differentiate between single defect and coexisting defects scenarios and estimate the defect sizes including length, width, and depth. Finite-element-method (FEM) simulation models are developed to investigate the effect of coexisting defects on the measured MFL data. The models with different defect parameters are calculated to generate 354 MFL data for the training and testing of deep learning method. The experimental results show that the classification accuracy of deep learning method is over 94% and higher than the traditional machine learning methods, and the defect size estimation errors are within 0.97 mm, 0.59 mm, and 3.67% of wall thickness, respectively, which are validated to be a good classification and characterization tool for the coexisting defects scenario.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.266 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIP AdvancesSame topicNon-Destructive Testing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207