MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7083306647 · doi:10.1061/jccee5.cpeng-6872

Mesh Increment Methodology for Improving Concrete Ultrasonic Tomography

2025· article· en· W7083306647 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Computing in Civil Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFood Security and Health in Diverse Populations
Canadian institutionsWiLAN (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNondestructive testingUltrasonic sensorIterative reconstructionVisualizationStiffnessTomographyIdentification (biology)Image (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ensuring the longevity of concrete structures is crucial for increasing their lifespan, and nondestructive tests play a key role in this context. Ultrasonic testing, a widely used nondestructive method, is employed to evaluate the heterogeneity and stiffness of concrete elements. Through advanced ultrasonic signal analysis, ultrasonic tomography enables the internal visualization of a structure’s state. Despite the development of reliable image reconstruction techniques, improving image resolution remains a challenge, particularly when dealing with limited data and mesh density issues. This study presents a method named the mesh increment (MESINC) method to enhance image resolution by incrementally densifying the mesh, even with a small number of tests around a concrete element. Two image reconstruction techniques—the simultaneous iterative reconstruction technique and algebraic reconstruction technique—are applied for image generation. Numerical simulations and experimental concrete sections are used to validate the effectiveness of the proposed method compared to regular image generation methods. The results demonstrate that the proposed MESINC method reduces reconstruction errors, enhances image contrast, and improves the identification of internal inclusions with better-defined shapes and positions. The findings suggest that this methodology can contribute to more accurate diagnostics of concrete elements, offering potential for improved nondestructive testing in civil engineering applications.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.112
GPT teacher head0.435
Teacher spread0.322 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Computing in Civil EngineeringSame topicFood Security and Health in Diverse PopulationsFrench-language works237,207