MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412402468 · doi:10.1038/s41529-025-00638-y

Corrosion type identification in flanged joints using recurrent neural networks on electrochemical noise measurements

2025· article· en· W4412402468 on OpenAlexafffund
Soroosh Hakimian, Abdel‐Hakim Bouzid, Lucas A. Hof

Bibliographic record

Venuenpj Materials Degradation · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Integrity and Reliability Analysis
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsElectrochemical noiseAutoencoderCorrosionFlangeComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceArtificial neural networkIdentification (biology)Cluster analysisUnsupervised learningPattern recognition (psychology)Classifier (UML)EngineeringStructural engineeringMaterials scienceMetallurgyElectrochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bolted flanged joints are essential for connecting piping and process equipment but are vulnerable to localized corrosion that leads to sudden, unpredictable leaks. Electrochemical noise (EN) measurements can detect such corrosion, yet processing EN data is time-consuming and requires expertise. This study applies recurrent neural networks (RNNs) to automate corrosion type identification on flange surfaces using raw EN signals from spontaneous electrochemical reactions. In this work, supervised, hybrid, and unsupervised ML approaches are evaluated using experimentally obtained EN data. Among supervised models, the long short-term memory (LSTM) model achieves 93.62% accuracy. A hybrid method combining LSTM autoencoder features with a random forest classifier improves accuracy to 97.85%. An unsupervised method using LSTM autoencoder, principal component analysis, and k-means clustering also shows strong potential for real-time corrosion monitoring. Automated identification of corrosion types on flanged joints supports more effective material protection strategies, reducing the risk of failure in critical infrastructure.

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 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.218
Threshold uncertainty score0.488

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuenpj Materials DegradationSame topicStructural Integrity and Reliability AnalysisFrench-language works237,207