Classification and Regression of Pinhole Corrosions on Pipelines Based on Magnetic Flux Leakage Signals Using Convolutional Neural Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pinhole corrosions on oil and gas pipelines are difficult to detect and size and, therefore, pose a significant challenge to the pipeline integrity management practice. This study develops two convolutional neural network (CNN) models to identify pinholes and predict the sizes and location of the pinhole corrosions according to the magnetic flux leakage signals generated using the magneto-static finite element analysis. Extensive three-dimensional parametric finite element analysis cases are generated to train and validate the two CNN models. Additionally, comprehensive algorithm analysis evaluates the model performance, providing insights into the practical application of CNN models in pipeline integrity management. The proposed classification CNN model is shown to be highly accurate in classifying pinholes and pinhole-in-general corrosion defects. The proposed regression CNN model is shown to be highly accurate in predicting the location of the pinhole and obtain a reasonably high accuracy in estimating the depth and diameter of the pinhole, even in the presence of measurement noises. This study indicates the effectiveness of employing deep learning algorithms to enhance the integrity management practice of corroded pipelines.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".