MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4398768940 · doi:10.58286/29928

Continuous Wave Ultrasound Testing Techniques

2024· article· en· W4398768940 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

Venuee-Journal of Nondestructive Testing · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUltrasonics and Acoustic Wave Propagation
Canadian institutionsCanadian Nuclear Laboratories
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUltrasonic sensorAcousticsContinuous waveTransducerUltrasoundTime domainSIGNAL (programming language)Ultrasonic testingComputer scienceElectronic engineeringOpticsEngineeringPhysicsComputer visionLaser

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Currently, the primary method employed for ultrasound inspection is based on sending and detecting ultrasound pulses. Typically, pulse-based methods are essentially time-domain back-reflection methods, and the time-of-flight is the main measured parameter. Recently, continuous-wave methods have been developed in the radar and the fiber-optics fields, which demonstrate significantly better spatial resolution, higher signal-to-noise ratio, and ability to detect reflecting objects at very short distances. It is proposed to use the same approach to develop continuous-wave ultrasound inspection systems. The two main differences between the proposed continuous-wave ultrasonic testing and the classical pulsed ultrasound inspection method are: (i) in the continuous-wave ultrasonic testing method, the transmitted and received signals overlap in the time domain, while in the pulsed ultrasound inspection method the transmitted and received signals are separated in the time; and (ii) in the pulsed ultrasound inspection method the most important parameter is the time delay between the transmitted and received signals, while in the continuous-wave ultrasonic testing method the most informative parameters are the frequency and phase changes in the received signal in respect to modulated transmitted signal. This allows for additional flexibility in the continuous-wave ultrasonic measurements, through control of the frequency modulation. Also, the continuous-wave ultrasonic method potentially offers improved detection range and resolution; improved signal-to-noise ratio due to better energy efficiency and easier filtering; and reduced requirements on the voltage applied to the transducer, which in turn allows the use of simplified low-cost electronics. The theoretical basis of several continuous-wave ultrasound inspection technique is explained, and their advantages and limitations are discussed. Implementation of several prototype continuous-wave ultrasound testing systems is presented. Examples of the use of the systems for non-destructive testing are described.

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)0.002
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.329
Threshold uncertainty score0.747

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.230
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