Paper detail

Determining HEDP Foams' Quality with Multi-View Deep Learning Classification

High energy density physics (HEDP) experiments commonly involve a dynamic wave-front propagating inside a low-density foam. This effect affects its density and hence, its transparency. A common problem in foam production is the creation of defective foams. Accurate information on their dimension and homogeneity is required to classify the foams' quality. Therefore, those parameters are being characterized using a 3D-measuring laser confocal microscope. For each foam, five images are taken: two 2D images representing the top and bottom surface foam planes and three images of side cross-sections from 3D scannings. An expert has to do the complicated, harsh, and exhausting work of manually classifying the foam's quality through the image set and only then determine whether the foam can be used in experiments or not. Currently, quality has two binary levels of normal vs. defective. At the same time, experts are commonly required to classify a sub-class of normal-defective, i.e., foams that are defective but might be sufficient for the needed experiment. This sub-class is problematic due to inconclusive judgment that is primarily intuitive. In this work, we present a novel state-of-the-art multi-view deep learning classification model that mimics the physicist's perspective by automatically determining the foams' quality classification and thus aids the expert. Our model achieved 86\% accuracy on upper and lower surface foam planes and 82\% on the entire set, suggesting interesting heuristics to the problem. A significant added value in this work is the ability to regress the foam quality instead of binary deduction and even explain the decision visually. The source code used in this work, as well as other relevant sources, are available at: https://github.com/Scientific-Computing-Lab-NRCN/Multi-View-Foams.git

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.