MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2108138788 · doi:10.1109/icma.2005.1626684

Robust adaptive control of machining operations

2006· article· en· W2108138788 on OpenAlexaff
Yuming Qin, Simon S. Park

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced machining processes and optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMachiningNumerical controlRobustness (evolution)Parametric statisticsMachine toolControl theory (sociology)Adaptive controlNoise (video)Cutting toolComputer scienceProcess (computing)EngineeringControl engineeringMechanical engineeringControl (management)MathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Machining parameters are often selected for worst-case cutting condition scenarios, based on the experience of operators, in order to avoid machine failures. This significantly limits the productivity of traditional computer numerical controlled (CNC) machining operations. Machining operations are especially susceptible to environmental noise and are also highly non-linear due to the complex nature of cutting operations. In order to improve the productivity and accuracy of machining operations in milling, an adaptive control algorithm can be used to provide optimal machining parameters by adapting to changes in cutting conditions such as depths of cut and disturbances. In this paper, a discrete-time sliding mode control algorithm is designed to maintain a desired peak cutting force in the presence of parametric uncertainty for a time-varying slot milling process. The controller, which is designed using conventional and decoupled disturbance estimation method, provides optimal cutting parameters automatically so that the desired productivity and constrained finished surface can be achieved. The models of the cutting process and machine dynamics, including parametric uncertainty, are also presented. The simulated cutting process and control results indicate that the discrete-time sliding mode control with parameter estimation performs well with high robustness.

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)0.003
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.185 · 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

Citations4
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced machining processes and optimizationFrench-language works237,207