<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="static/style.xsl"?><OAI-PMH xmlns="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/OAI-PMH.xsd"><responseDate>2026-07-20T00:04:54Z</responseDate><request verb="GetRecord" identifier="oai:riubu.ubu.es:10259/3928" metadataPrefix="mods">https://riubu.ubu.es/oai/request</request><GetRecord><record><header><identifier>oai:riubu.ubu.es:10259/3928</identifier><datestamp>2024-05-13T07:56:35Z</datestamp><setSpec>com_10259_3830</setSpec><setSpec>com_10259_5086</setSpec><setSpec>com_10259_2604</setSpec><setSpec>col_10259_3832</setSpec></header><metadata><mods:mods xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3" xmlns:doc="http://www.lyncode.com/xoai" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3 http://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/v3/mods-3-1.xsd">
<mods:name>
<mods:namePart>Pereda, María</mods:namePart>
</mods:name>
<mods:name>
<mods:namePart>Santos Martín, José Ignacio</mods:namePart>
</mods:name>
<mods:name>
<mods:namePart>Martín, Óscar</mods:namePart>
</mods:name>
<mods:name>
<mods:namePart>Galán Ordax, José Manuel</mods:namePart>
</mods:name>
<mods:extension>
<mods:dateAvailable encoding="iso8601">2016-02-12T12:38:23Z</mods:dateAvailable>
</mods:extension>
<mods:extension>
<mods:dateAccessioned encoding="iso8601">2016-02-12T12:38:23Z</mods:dateAccessioned>
</mods:extension>
<mods:originInfo>
<mods:dateIssued encoding="iso8601">2015-11</mods:dateIssued>
</mods:originInfo>
<mods:identifier type="issn">1362-1718</mods:identifier>
<mods:identifier type="uri">http://hdl.handle.net/10259/3928</mods:identifier>
<mods:identifier type="doi">10.1179/1362171815Y.0000000052</mods:identifier>
<mods:abstract>In this work, several of the most popular and state-of-the-art classification methods are compared as pattern recognition tools for classification&#xd;
of resistance spot welding joints. Instead of using the result of a non-destructive&#xd;
testing technique as input variables, classifiers are trained directly with the&#xd;
relevant welding parameters, i.e. welding current, welding time and the type of&#xd;
electrode (electrode material and treatment). The algorithms are compared in&#xd;
terms of accuracy and area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC)&#xd;
curve metrics, using nested cross-validation. Results show that although there is not a dominant classifier for every specificity/sensitivity requirement, support vector machines using radial kernel, boosting and random forest techniques obtain the best performance overall</mods:abstract>
<mods:language>
<mods:languageTerm>eng</mods:languageTerm>
</mods:language>
<mods:accessCondition type="useAndReproduction">info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess</mods:accessCondition>
<mods:subject>
<mods:topic>Resistance spot welding</mods:topic>
</mods:subject>
<mods:subject>
<mods:topic>Classification</mods:topic>
</mods:subject>
<mods:subject>
<mods:topic>Pattern recognition</mods:topic>
</mods:subject>
<mods:subject>
<mods:topic>Quality control</mods:topic>
</mods:subject>
<mods:subject>
<mods:topic>Support vector machines</mods:topic>
</mods:subject>
<mods:subject>
<mods:topic>Random forest</mods:topic>
</mods:subject>
<mods:subject>
<mods:topic>Artificial neural networks</mods:topic>
</mods:subject>
<mods:titleInfo>
<mods:title>Direct quality prediction in resistance spot welding process: Sensitivity, specificity and predictive accuracy comparative analysis</mods:title>
</mods:titleInfo>
<mods:genre>info:eu-repo/semantics/article</mods:genre>
</mods:mods></metadata></record></GetRecord></OAI-PMH>