A Complementary Fusion-Based Multimodal Non-Destructive Testing and Evaluation Using Phased-Array Ultrasonic and Pulsed Thermography on a Composite Structure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Combinative methodologies have the potential to address the drawbacks of unimodal non-destructive testing and evaluation (NDT & E) when inspecting multilayer structures. The aim of this study is to investigate the integration of information gathered via phased-array ultrasonic testing (PAUT) and pulsed thermography (PT), addressing the challenges posed by surface-level anomalies in PAUT and the limited deep penetration in PT. A center-of-mass-based registration method was proposed to align shapeless inspection results in consecutive insertions. Subsequently, the aligned inspection images were merged using complementary techniques, including maximum, weighted-averaging, depth-driven combination (DDC), and wavelet decomposition. The results indicated that although individual inspections may have lower mean absolute error (MAE) ratings than fused images, the use of complementary fusion improved defect identification in the total number of detections across numerous layers of the structure. Detection errors are analyzed, and a tendency to overestimate defect sizes is revealed with individual inspection methods. This study concludes that complementary fusion provides a more comprehensive understanding of overall defect detection throughout the thickness, highlighting the importance of leveraging multiple modalities for improved inspection outcomes in structural analysis.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".