MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2009972531 · doi:10.1016/j.procir.2015.04.048

The Coherent Point Drift Algorithm Adapted for Fixtureless Metrology of Non-rigid Parts

2015· article· en· W2009972531 on OpenAlexafffund
Ali Aidibe, Antoine Tahan

Bibliographic record

VenueProcedia CIRP · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Measurement and Metrology Techniques
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaÉcole de technologie supérieure
KeywordsCADMetrologyPoint (geometry)Rigid bodyDimensional metrologyAlgorithmAerospaceResidualEngineeringTransformation (genetics)Computer scienceEngineering drawingMechanical engineeringMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Unlike the metrology of rigid parts, no viable and industrial solutions in the case of non-rigid parts are available. Due to gravity load and residual stress, non-rigid parts (flexible, compliant) may have in a Free State condition a significant different shape than their corresponding nominal geometry (CAD model). As a result, very expensive and specialized fixtures mounting are needed by the industry to constrain the component during the inspection. Dealing with this real industrial problem, this paper proposes a new method to inspect non-rigid parts without these specialized fixtures. In this method, the CAD model is smoothly modified to fit the scanned part respecting two criteria that belong to non-rigid parts. The first criterion is the isometric transformation (or the condition that stretch should be very small) between the original CAD model and the modified one. The second criterion is the Euclidian distance between the modified CAD model and its corresponding scanned part. The proposed approach consists of adapting the Coherent Point Drift powerful non rigid registration method to meet the specifications of non-rigid parts. In other words, by minimizing the two above criteria, the paper proposes a ‘flexible’ registration to align the scanned manufactured compliant part to its nominal model in order to compare them and to deliver an inspection report. Satisfying results were obtained when validating the proposed method on a case study taken from the aerospace industry. The low percentage of error between the estimated value of defect and the reference one reflect the effectiveness of the proposed approach.

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 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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.957
Threshold uncertainty score0.456

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProcedia CIRPSame topicAdvanced Measurement and Metrology TechniquesFrench-language works237,207