A scheme for functional tolerancing: A product family in 3D CAD system
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To meet the need for product variety, many companies are shifting from a massproduction mode to mass customization, which demands quick response to the needs of individual customers with high quality and low costs. The multifunctional nature of mechanical components necessitates that a designer redesign them each time when a component's function changes. The functional Geometric Dimensioning & Tolerancing (GD&T) specification, also called functional tolerancing, must be updated for each component. Currently, this is done by humans, and thus can be very time-consuming and error-prone. Functional tolerancing is one of the main obstacles to practical mechanical product family modeling. In this paper, a graph-based functional tolerancing scheme in 3D CAD is proposed. In the scheme, a product is generated by applying production rules to the graph of the base product, following customers' or manufacturing engineers' requirements. Functional tolerancing of each component of a product in the family is formulated as a non-linear constrained optimization (or cost minimization) process. Certain critical aspects of the scheme have been implemented in SolidWorks , by using its Application Programming Interface (API) and C++. LEDA and MATLAB have been used to solve the graph and optimization problems.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it