MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2097299880 · doi:10.1080/17452750701330968

Optimal part orientation in layered manufacturing using evolutionary stickers-based DNA algorithm

2007· article· en· W2097299880 on OpenAlexaff
Satish Tyagi, Apoorva Ghorpade, K. P. Karunakaran, Manoj Kumar Tiwari

Bibliographic record

VenueVirtual and Physical Prototyping · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicModular Robots and Swarm Intelligence
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrientation (vector space)AlgorithmSalientGenetic algorithmRepresentation (politics)Process (computing)Computer scienceRotation (mathematics)Reduction (mathematics)Industrial engineeringEngineering drawingArtificial intelligenceEngineeringMathematicsMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over recent years, layered manufacturing (LM) has been one of the most important emerging research areas, as well as practice perspective, owing to its capability to reduce the product development time, and therefore time-to-market. In LM, owing to the significant role played by the part orientation in the successful and efficient reduction of the staircase effect, the determination of optimal part orientation is a matter of paramount importance. In this research, the dual parameters problem has been modelled, taking into consideration the constraints pertaining to the rotation of the computer aided design (CAD) model about two axes, while aiming to optimize the objective function that involves layered process error as well as build time. The current paper presents an advanced stickers-based DNA algorithm (SDNA) inspired by the characteristics of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) as a tool to achieve the optimal orientation during fabrication of a part. The salient feature of the proposed algorithm is the use of stickers along with DNA memory strand, which are responsible for the representation of information. Moreover, fundamental operations are applied to manipulate the positions of the stickers in essentially all the possible ways. The performance of SDNA has been tested on two standard case studies and the comparisons are made with results obtained from genetic algorithm (GA). The results clearly demonstrate the efficacy of proposed algorithm over GA when applied to the underlying 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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations35
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVirtual and Physical PrototypingSame topicModular Robots and Swarm IntelligenceFrench-language works237,207