MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388681953 · doi:10.1002/cjce.25130

Automated nanofibre sizing by multi‐image processing and deep learning with revised <scp>UNet</scp> model

2023· article· en· W4388681953 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Machining and Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersUniversity of Waterloo
KeywordsSizingDeep learningComputer scienceConsistency (knowledge bases)Artificial intelligenceMATLABSoftwareImage processingMeasure (data warehouse)Image (mathematics)Engineering drawingData miningEngineeringChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Nanofibres have been widely used in many chemical engineering applications and their performance greatly depends on the size distribution of the nanofibres. Researchers have developed automated tools to determine nanofibre diameters, primarily using commercial MATLAB software package. However, no researchers have reported automatic processing of multiple images, which is essential to the consistency and accuracy of results. Nor has anyone reported nanofibre sizing using deep learning. Therefore, this paper reports an automated tool to measure the size distribution of electrospun nanofibres by simultaneous multi‐image processing. This tool determines the diameters of nanofibres using deep learning based on UNet model. Results show that the UNet‐based deep learning approach is more accurate than those obtained using existing methods, compared to experimental data.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.562
Threshold uncertainty score0.540

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.195 · 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