MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2034415237 · doi:10.1115/detc2010-28279

A Genetic Algorithm Based Optimization for Laminated Dies Manufacturing

2010· article· en· W2034415237 on OpenAlexaff
Hossein Ahari, Amir Khajepour, Sanjeev Bedi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicManufacturing Process and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGenetic algorithmMachiningReduction (mathematics)Computer scienceConvergence (economics)Cost reductionPremature convergenceManufacturing costCADMathematical optimizationAlgorithmLayer (electronics)Optimization problemEngineering drawingEngineeringMechanical engineeringMathematicsMaterials scienceMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Laminated tooling is one of the new technologies which helps companies to manufacture parts with lower costs and higher accuracy. It is base on dividing entire CAD model of the part to slices and then cutting each layer profile utilizing laser cut or other techniques. Finally the layers are stacked together to make the final product. CNC machining removes the extra material and brings the part to the specific tolerances. In order to minimize the manufacturing cost, one option is reduction in the amount of the extra material and the number of slices likewise. This is considered as an optimization problem in this research. Then a genetic algorithms (G.A.) based method is offered to solve this optimization problem. However, as a common problem in most instances of genetic algorithms, premature convergence prevents system to continue searching for a more reliable solution after finding a local optimum. To address this problem, a novel niching method is presented in this paper. Results show a significant improvement in the quality of the solution as well as a considerable reduction in processing time.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.370
Threshold uncertainty score0.467

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicManufacturing Process and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207