MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2084303877 · doi:10.1115/msec2011-50228

Optimal Sensor Location to Estimate Temperature Distribution in an Injection Mould

2011· article· en· W2084303877 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInjection Molding Process and Properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSensitivity (control systems)Cluster analysisFinite element methodSimilarity (geometry)Artificial neural networkWireless sensor networkTemperature measurementCluster (spacecraft)Distribution (mathematics)Computer scienceThermalBiological systemAlgorithmMathematicsArtificial intelligenceEngineeringElectronic engineeringStructural engineeringPhysicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this research is to identify optimal sensor locations to estimate temperature distribution in an injection mould using finite element analysis. Potential locations (referred to as target nodes) are grouped based on the similarity of their thermal response using a proposed temperature-ratio clustering method. A sensitivity analysis of the temperature distribution for these groups of target nodes identifies the sensor location for each cluster that exhibits the highest sensitivity to variable inputs. Using identified sensor locations with a neural network model, the accuracy in estimation of temperature response is evaluated.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.498
Threshold uncertainty score0.331

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInjection Molding Process and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207