Model-Quality-Adaptive Probability of Detection Across Multiple Inspection Scenarios
Bibliographic record
Abstract
No abstract is available for this record. The assistant can identify its topic from the title, but cannot infer the study’s results.
Source: Not provided · Quality: missing
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference · Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials · Markov Chains and Monte Carlo Methods
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (61)
Show source-provided references
1. Core Parts, LLC.: (2025). https://coreparts.com/
2. Scheirer, N.: Applying hierarchical Bayesian modeling and machine learning techniques to facilitate process qualification for vibrothermography. PhD thesis, Iowa State University (2025)
3. Jarvis, R., Cawley, P., Nagy, P.B.: Performance evaluation of a magnetic field measurement NDE technique using a model assisted probability of detection framework. NDT & E International 91, 61–70 (2017)10.1016/j.ndteint.2017.06.006 ↗
4. Knopp, J.S., Aldrin, J.C., Lindgren, E., Annis, C.: Investigation of a model-assisted approach to probability of detection evaluation. In: AIP Conference Proceedings, vol. 894, pp. 1775–1782 (2007). American Institute of Physics10.1063/1.2718178 ↗
5. Nakagawa, N., Thompson, R.: Model-assisted probability of detection: Use of NDE models and statistical qualification of model predictions. In: Proceeding of the 7th World Conference on NDE in the Nuclear Industry, Yokohama, Japan (2009)
6. Rentala, V.K., Mylavarapu, P., Gautam, J.P.: Issues in estimating probability of detection of NDT techniques-A model assisted approach. Ultrasonics 87, 59–70 (2018)10.1016/j.ultras.2018.02.012 ↗
7. Aldrin, J.C., Knopp, J.S.: Case study for new feature extraction algorithms, automated data classification, and model-assisted probability of detection evaluation. In: AIP Conference Proceedings, vol. 894, pp. 257–264 (2007). American Institute of Physics10.1063/1.2717981 ↗
8. Koshti, A., Parker, P.A., Forsyth, D.S., Suits, M.W., Walker, J.L., Prosser, W.H.: Guidebook for assessing similarity and implementing empirical transfer functions for probability of detection (POD) demonstrations for signal based nondestructive evaluation (NDE) methods. Technical report, NASA (2022)
9. Bode, M.D., Newcomer, J., Fitchett, S.: Transfer function model-assisted probability of detection for lap joint multi site damage detection. In: AIP Conference Proceedings, vol. 1430, pp. 1749–1756 (2012). American Institute of Physics10.1063/1.4716423 ↗
10. Harding, C., Hugo, G., Bowles, S.: Application of model-assisted POD using a transfer function approach. In: AIP Conference Proceedings, vol. 1096, pp. 1792–1799 (2009). American Institute of Physics10.1063/1.3114176 ↗
11. Smith, K.: POD Transfer Function Approach Presented to the MAPOD Working Group at the February 4, 2005 meeting in Palm Springs, California
12. Ali, M.S.S.A., Kumar, A., Rajagopal, P.: Signal noise based transfer function approach for reliability estimation of ultrasonic inspection. Ultrasonics 96, 276–283 (2019)10.1016/j.ultras.2018.09.015 ↗
13. Koshti, A.M.: Transfer function models for using empirical and physics-based simulation signal response data. In: Health Monitoring of Structural and Biological Systems XVIII, vol. 12951, pp. 496–510 (2024). SPIE10.1117/12.3010060 ↗
14. Harding, C.A.: Methods for assessment of probability of detection for nondestructive inspections. University of Melbourne (2008)
15. Thompson, R.B., Brasche, L.H., Forsyth, D., Lindgren, E., Swindell, P., Winfree, W.: Recent advances in model-assisted probability of detection. Center for Nondestructive Evaluation Conference Papers, Posters and Presentations. 101 (2009)
16. Thompson, R.B.: A unified approach to the model-assisted determination of probability of detection. In: AIP Conference Proceedings, vol. 975, pp. 1685–1692 (2008). American Institute of Physics10.1063/1.2902639 ↗
17. Nondestructive evaluation system reliability assessment, Department of Defense Handbook. Technical report, United States Department of Defense, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (2009). MIL-HDBK-1823A. http://everyspec.com/MIL-HDBK/MIL-HDBK-1800-1999/MIL-HDBK-1823A_33187/
18. Lindgren, E., Forsyth, D., Aldrin, J., Spencer, F.: Probability of detection. In: Nondestructive Evaluation of Materials. ASM International, Materials Park, Ohio (2018). https://doi.org/10.31399/asm.hb.v17.a000646310.31399/asm.hb.v17.a0006463 ↗
19. Aldrin, J.C., Knopp, J.S., Lindgren, E.A., Jata, K.V.: Model-assisted probability of detection evaluation for eddy current inspection of fastener sites. In: AIP Conference Proceedings, vol. 1096, pp. 1784–1791 (2009). American Institute of Physics10.1063/1.3114175 ↗
20. Smith, K., Thompson, B., Meeker, B., Gray, T., Brasche, L.: Model-assisted probability of detection validation for immersion ultrasonic application. In: AIP Conference Proceedings, vol. 894, pp. 1816–1822 (2007). American Institute of Physics10.1063/1.2718184 ↗
21. Du, X., Leifsson, L., Meeker, W., Gurrala, P., Song, J., Roberts, R.: Efficient model-assisted probability of detection and sensitivity analysis for ultrasonic testing simulations using stochastic metamodeling. Journal of Nondestructive Evaluation, Diagnostics and Prognostics of Engineering Systems 2(4), 041002 (2019)10.1115/1.4044446 ↗
22. Du, X., Leifsson, L.: Multifidelity model-assisted probability of detection via Cokriging. NDT & E International 108, 102156 (2019)10.1016/j.ndteint.2019.102156 ↗
23. Li, M., Meeker, W.Q., Thompson, R.B.: Physical model-assisted probability of detection of flaws in titanium forgings using ultrasonic nondestructive evaluation. Technometrics 56(1), 78–91 (2014)10.1080/00401706.2013.818580 ↗
24. Burrowes, M., Pereira, G., Tavares, L.: Validation and calibration of computer-simulated probability of detection curves from ultrasonic inspection. Insight-Non-Destructive Testing and Condition Monitoring 61(4), 197–203 (2019)10.1784/insi.2019.61.4.197 ↗
25. Lei, X., Wirdelius, H., Rosell, A.: Simulation-based investigation of a probability of detection (POD) model using phased array ultrasonic testing (PAUT) technique. J. Nondestr. Eval. 41(2), 40 (2022)10.1007/s10921-022-00873-2 ↗
26. Mendler, A., Döhler, M., Grosse, C.U.: Predictive probability of detection curves based on data from undamaged structures. Struct. Health Monit. 23(3), 1725–1741 (2024)10.1177/14759217231193088 ↗
27. Küttenbaum, S., Braml, T., Taffe, A., Keßler, S., Maack, S.: Reliability assessment of existing structures using results of nondestructive testing. Struct. Concr. 22(5), 2895–2915 (2021)10.1002/suco.202100226 ↗
28. Carboni, M., Cantini, S.: A model assisted probability of detection approach for ultrasonic inspection of railway axles. In: 18th World Conference on Nondestructive Testing, pp. 16–20 (2012)
29. Harding, C., Hugo, G., Bowles, S.: Model-assisted probability of detection validation of automated ultrasonic scanning for crack detection at fastener holes. In: Proceedings of the 10th Joint FAA/DoD/NASA Conference on Aging Aircraft, Palm Springs, CA, pp. 16–19 (2007)
30. Lee, D., Yoon, S., Park, J., Eum, S., Cho, H.: Demonstration of model-assisted probability of detection framework for ultrasonic inspection of cracks in compressor blades. NDT & E International 128, 102618 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ndteint.2022.10261810.1016/j.ndteint.2022.102618 ↗
31. Bernardo, J.M., Smith, A.F.: Bayesian Theory, vol. 405. John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, New Jersey (2009)
32. Meeker, W.Q., Escobar, L.A., Pascual, F.G.: Statistical Methods for Reliability Data. John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, New Jersey (2022)
33. Aldrin, J.C., Knopp, J.S., Sabbagh, H.A.: Bayesian methods in probability of detection estimation and model-assisted probability of detection evaluation. In: AIP Conference Proceedings, vol. 1511, pp. 1733–1740 (2013). American Institute of Physics10.1063/1.4789250 ↗
34. Aldrin, J.C., Medina, E.A., Lindgren, E.A., Buynak, C.F., Knopp, J.S.: Protocol for reliability assessment of structural health monitoring systems incorporating model-assisted probability of detection (MAPOD) approach. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Workshop on Structural Health Monitoring, Stanford, pp. 13–15 (2011)
35. Aldrin, J.C., Sabbagh, H.A., Murphy, R.K., Sabbagh, E.H., Knopp, J.S., Lindgren, E.A., Cherry, M.R.: Demonstration of model-assisted probability of detection evaluation methodology for eddy current nondestructive evaluation. In: AIP Conference Proceedings, vol. 1430, pp. 1733–1740 (2012). American Institute of Physics10.1063/1.4716421 ↗
36. Ali, M.S.S.A., Kumar, A., Rao, P.B., Tammana, J., Balasubramaniam, K., Rajagopal, P.: Bayesian synthesis for simulation-based generation of probability of detection (POD) curves. Ultrasonics 84, 210–222 (2018)10.1016/j.ultras.2017.11.004 ↗
37. Keller, M., Popelin, A.-L., Bousquet, N., Remy, E.: Nonparametric estimation of the probability of detection of flaws in an industrial component, from destructive and nondestructive testing data, using approximate Bayesian computation. Risk Anal. 35(9), 1595–1610 (2015)10.1111/risa.12484 ↗
38. Virkkunen, I., Kemppainen, M., Miettinen, K.: Quantifying NDE reliability from ENIQ qualification information. In: Proceedings of the 5th European-American Workshop on Reliability of NDE, pp. 7–13 (2013)
39. Thompson, R.B.: A Bayesian approach to the inversion of NDE and SHM data. In: AIP Conference Proceedings, vol. 1211, pp. 679–686 (2010). American Institute of Physics10.1063/1.3362460 ↗
40. Kennedy, M.C., O’Hagan, A.: Bayesian calibration of computer models. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Statistical Methodology) 63(3), 425–464 (2001)10.1111/1467-9868.00294 ↗
41. Boedeker, P.: Hierarchical linear modeling with maximum likelihood, restricted maximum likelihood, and fully bayesian estimation. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation 22(1) (2017)
42. N.S.C.: Nondestructive evaluation requirements for fracture-critical metallic components (2023)
43. Kanzler, D., Olm, G., Friedrich, A. and Selch, M.: Non-destructive testing-evaluation of testing data-guideline to estimate the reliability of applications (2025). https://doi.org/10.31030/360146410.31030/3601464 ↗
44. Gelman, A., Carlin, J.B., Stern, H.S., Rubin, D.B.: Bayesian Data Analysis. Chapman and Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, Florida (1995)10.1201/9780429258411 ↗
45. Chung, Y., Rabe-Hesketh, S., Dorie, V., Gelman, A., Liu, J.: A nondegenerate penalized likelihood estimator for variance parameters in multilevel models. Psychometrika 78, 685–709 (2013)10.1007/s11336-013-9328-2 ↗
46. Lewandowski, D., Kurowicka, D., Joe, H.: Generating random correlation matrices based on vines and extended onion method. J. Multivar. Anal. 100(9), 1989–2001 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmva.2009.04.00810.1016/j.jmva.2009.04.008 ↗
47. Gelman, A.: Prior distributions for variance parameters in hierarchical models (comment on article by Browne and Draper) (2006)10.1214/06-BA117A ↗
48. Oriol, A.-P., Virgile, A., Colin, C., Larry, D., J., F.C., Maxim, K., Ravin, K., Jupeng, L., C., L.C., A., M.O., Michael, O., Ricardo, V., Thomas, W., Robert, Z.: PyMC: A modern and comprehensive probabilistic programming framework in Python. PeerJ Computer Science 9, 1516 (2023).https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj-cs.151610.7717/peerj-cs.1516 ↗
49. Hoffman, M.D., Gelman, A.: The No-U-Turn Sampler: Adaptively Setting Path Lengths in Hamiltonian Monte Carlo (2011). arXiv:1111.4246
50. Levin, D.A., Peres, Y.: Markov Chains and Mixing Times, vol. 107. American Mathematical Society, Providence, Rhode Island (2017)10.1090/mbk/107 ↗
51. Vehtari, A., Gelman, A., Simpson, D., Carpenter, B., Bürkner, P.-C.: Rank-normalization, folding, and localization: An improved $$\hat{R}$$ for assessing convergence of MCMC (with discussion). Bayesian Anal. 16(2), 667–718 (2021)10.1214/20-BA1221 ↗
52. Kumar, R., Carroll, C., Hartikainen, A., Martin, O.: ArviZ a unified library for exploratory analysis of Bayesian models in Python. Journal of Open Source Software 4(33), 1143 (2019). https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.0114310.21105/joss.01143 ↗
53. Holland, S.D., Koester, L., Vaddi, J., Lesthaeghe, T., Meeker, W.Q., Schiefelbein, B.: Vibrosim: A hybrid computational/empirical model of vibrothermography nondestructive evaluation. AIP Conf. Proc. 1706(1), 100008 (2016)10.1063/1.4940568 ↗
54. Reifsnider, K., Henneke, E.G., Stinchcomb, W.: The mechanics of vibrothermography. In: Mechanics of Nondestructive Testing, pp. 249–276. Springer, New York, New York (1980)10.1007/978-1-4684-3857-4_12 ↗
55. Rantala, J., Wu, D., Busse, G.: Amplitude-modulated lock-in vibrothermography for NDE of polymers and composites. Res. Nondestr. Eval. 7(4), 215–228 (1996)10.1080/09349849609409580 ↗
56. Favro, L., Han, X., Ouyang, Z., Sun, G., Thomas, R.: Sonic IR imaging of cracks and delaminations. In: Analytical Sciences/Supplements Proceedings of 11th International Conference of Photoacoustic and Photothermal Phenomena, pp. 451–453 (2002). The Japan Society for Analytical Chemistry
57. Holland, S.D.: Thermographic signal reconstruction for vibrothermography. Infrared Physics & Technology 54(6), 503–511 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infrared.2011.07.00410.1016/j.infrared.2011.07.004 ↗
58. Li, M., Holland, S.D., Meeker, W.Q.: Statistical methods for automatic crack detection based on vibrothermography sequence-of-images data. Appl. Stoch. Model. Bus. Ind. 26(5), 481–495 (2010)10.1002/asmb.866 ↗
59. Vaddi, J.S., Lesthaeghe, T.J., Holland, S.D.: Determining heat intensity of a fatigue crack from measured surface temperature for vibrothermography. Meas. Sci. Technol. 31(9),(2020). https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6501/ab8cfd10.1088/1361-6501/ab8cfd ↗
60. Giuffre, C.: The application of fracture mechanics to Mode I interfacial ice delamination and plasticity induced crack closure. PhD thesis, Iowa State University (2021)
61. Moldenhauer H. H. M, B.A.F. Holland S. D.: A Method to Estimate Changes in Contact Stress Distributions for Partially Closed Fatigue Cracks in Mode 1 Loading. In preparation (2024)10.1007/s10704-024-00833-z ↗