MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4398769056 · doi:10.58286/29905

AI-based Model to Estimate the Flaws from Ultrasonic NDT Data

2024· article· en· W4398769056 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
TopicNon-Destructive Testing Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNondestructive testingUltrasonic sensorMean squared errorFinite element methodUltrasonic testingAcousticsArtificial neural networkComputer scienceEngineeringStructural engineeringArtificial intelligenceMathematicsStatisticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study explores an artificial intelligence (AI) approach for assessing the geometrical features of flaws in nondestructive testing (NDT) using ultrasonic oscillograms. A validated numerical model, generated through acoustic finite element analysis (FEA), produced ultrasonic signals. The AI model was trained on 525, validated on 113, and tested on 112 oscillograms from models with varied flaw characteristics. Training inputs were parameters derived from ultrasonic signals, and the network's performance was evaluated by comparing its outputs for flaw location, length, and angle with desired values. Statistical analysis, including Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) and Efficiency (E), indicated promising results, suggesting the potential of the proposed AI-based method for estimating flaw geometrical features in ultrasonic NDT.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.431
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.283 · 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