“…Yet, the physical origins of the magnetic stray field formation have so far mainly been attributed to (i) macroscopic stress gradients in the material (often referred to as “stress concentration zones”, SCZ) [ 13 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 26 , 29 ]; (ii) (locally) increased dislocation densities [ 13 , 16 , 18 , 19 , 26 ]; and (iii) the associated local magnetic permeability reduction due to plastic deformation [ 14 , 17 , 29 ]. Note that topography must be expected for most of the damage states being within the scope of MMM testing, such as welded joints (seam topography) [ 51 , 52 , 53 ], bulging, buckling, and barreling under non-uniform compressive loading [ 54 , 55 , 56 ], corrosion pits and stress corrosion cracking [ 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 ], inhomogeneous growth and spalling of (e.g., iron) oxide scales [ 61 ], and slip bands, and even intrusions and extrusions resulting from fatigue loading [ 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 ]. Our results demonstrate that disregarded surface topographies may provoke safety-relevant misinterpretations when using the MMM technique for quantitative stress analyses.…”