MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1969806451 · doi:10.6000/1927-5129.2014.10.63

Methods of Measurement System Quality Assessment in Case of Two Devices

2014· article· en· W1969806451 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Krzysztof Kowal, Michał Szymczak

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Basic & Applied Sciences · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSurface Treatment and Coatings
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceVariance (accounting)Quality (philosophy)Sample (material)Industrial engineeringSystem of measurementRegression analysisRegressionVariance componentsCoordinate-measuring machineReliability engineeringData miningStatisticsEngineeringMathematicsMachine learningMechanical engineeringAccounting

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article discussed the selected methods of measurement systems analysis (MSA) in case of different devices usage. Analysis of variance is a common method, widely accepted and applied in industry to analyze measurement systems by taking into consideration different sources of variability: equipment, operators, parts and their interaction. Regression is a method which could simplify the analysis by shortening its time and decreasing sample size. It also may enable more clear and suitable answer. The included case study concerning two coordinate measuring machines (CMM) indicates the usefulness of the regression as a method for high precision and automated measurement systems comparison. Some actions resulting from the inferences can be undertaken by managers and engineers in industrial enterprises to reduce the cost of double measurements.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.294 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Basic & Applied SciencesSame topicSurface Treatment and CoatingsFrench-language works237,207