MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414271693 · doi:10.1109/tmech.2025.3602812

Systematic Error Correction in Robotic-OCT Inspection of Hard-to-Reach Industrial Parts

2025· article· en· W4414271693 on OpenAlexaff
Xingjian Liu, Xiaolong Yu, Yurui Pu, Wangping Xiong, R. Zou, Zhongxing Wang, Jiancai Huang, Yu Sun

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIndustrial Vision Systems and Defect Detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersLiaoning Revitalization Talents Program
KeywordsCompleteness (order theory)Distortion (music)Systematic errorError detection and correctionRotation (mathematics)Point cloudCoherence (philosophical gambling strategy)Point (geometry)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hard-to-reach industrial parts have complex geometries, such as internal holes and deep cavities, posing challenges for accurate 3-D measurement. Robotic-arm-assisted optical coherence tomography (robotic-OCT) is a promising method for its ability to access hard-to-reach spaces with a compact probe, high resolution, and flexibility. However, probe misalignment and nonuniform rotation in robotic-OCT systems introduce systematic errors and sacrifice measurement accuracy. In this article, we report a technique for achieving precise self-alignment between the OCT probe and workpiece by utilizing the data feedback mechanism inherent in OCT scanning. We also propose a nonuniform rotational distortion correction method to rectify distortion errors. Experimental results showed that the proposed method improved point cloud completeness to 98.7%, surpassing uncorrected (77.6% ) and manual correction (96.8% ), and reduced errors by 84.1% compared to uncorrected and 13.0% compared to manual correction, while greatly enhancing efficiency over manual correction. The robotic-OCT system, with reduced errors, achieved a measurement accuracy better than 4.5 <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><tex-math notation="LaTeX">$\boldsymbol {\mu }$</tex-math></inline-formula>m for internal holes with diameters from 5 to 100 mm.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.824
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.225 · 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.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE/ASME Transactions on MechatronicsSame topicIndustrial Vision Systems and Defect DetectionFrench-language works237,207