Translation of MFL and UT data by using generative adversarial networks: A comparative study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Magnetic flux leakage (MFL) and ultrasonic testing (UT) are widely used in-line inspection technologies to detect corrosion defects along pipelines. The integration of MFL and UT data has the potential to provide complementary insights that facilitate a comprehensive assessment of pipeline integrity. However, due to the inherent dissimilarity with their underlying physical principles, these techniques yield notable disparities in signal characteristics, posing challenges in integrating these multimodal data. This study aims to establish a translation mapping between MFL and UT signals to achieve consistent physical interpretations across the two modalities. Thus, this study explored the feasibility of generative adversarial network (GAN) based models encompassing both supervised and unsupervised translation approaches contingent on the availability of aligned data. Furthermore, two translation modes, MFL-UT and UT-MFL, were analyzed separately to understand the effectiveness of the translation direction. The experimental results demonstrate satisfactory performance for both aligned and unaligned data translation, with the UT-MFL translation direction yielding superior results. Overall, the translation approaches pave the way for future applications, especially in subsequent data analysis tasks such as registration, comparison, and fusion of multimodal data.
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 | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".