MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399423976 · doi:10.1117/12.3014123

Heat source selection for drone-based active-infrared thermography

2024· article· en· W4399423976 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrared Target Detection Methodologies
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThermographyDroneInfraredSelection (genetic algorithm)Computer scienceArtificial intelligenceRemote sensingGeologyOpticsPhysicsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A drone-based inspection system that can fly, hover, and navigate around structures to perform the inspection in an efficient/fast manner can considerably reduce inspection time. Active thermography is a well-known non-destructive testing method for inspection. However, using it on a drone is challenging due to the drone needing to carry an appropriate heat source, batteries or tethering system to power the heat source and to provide adequate flight time. This complicates the inspection process and can restrict the amount of thermal energy that can be applied to the inspected structure. Another challenge with drone-based active infrared thermography (DBAIT) is that, unlike traditional active thermography inspection in which, the source is either stationary or moving in a precisely controlled manner, the drone and the heat source are subjected to undesired dynamic motion. This paper presents the results of experiments performed to compare potential heat sources that can be retrofitted onboard a drone to conduct active thermographic inspection.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.591
Threshold uncertainty score0.588

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInfrared Target Detection MethodologiesFrench-language works237,207