MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1967332144 · doi:10.1080/09511920802403933

Optimal layout and path planning for flame cutting of sheet metals

2009· article· en· W1967332144 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptimization and Packing Problems
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematical optimizationPath (computing)Computer scienceHeuristicBlock (permutation group theory)Path lengthAlgorithmMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a two-stage methodology for the optimisation of layout and path planning that can be used in flame cutting of sheet metals. The main objective of this paper is to minimise the total travel distance of the flame gun that will not only reduce the cutting time but also the heat effect. The first stage is to use a heuristic to cluster a set of small rectangular items (called workpieces) into one or more large rectangular objects (called blocks) and then best fit these blocks into a given stock. By allowing clustered small items to be cut along common borderlines, the travel distance within blocks is minimised. The second stage is to use genetic algorithms (GAs) to determine an optimal path in consideration of multiple start points for each block. The proposed path planning method provides an advantage by minimising the travel distance between blocks. The combination of the two solutions leads to minimisation of the total travel distance. To demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed method, a number of cases are studied with results showing a 20% average reduction in the total travel distance in comparison to conventional methods.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.492
Threshold uncertainty score0.489

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.239 · 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