MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125948572 · doi:10.1051/ijmqe/2013051

Performance study of dimensionality reduction methods for metrology of nonrigid mechanical parts

2013· article· en· W2125948572 on OpenAlex
Hassan Radvar-Esfahlan, Antoine Tahan

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Metrology and Quality Engineering · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Measurement and Metrology Techniques
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMetrologyDimensionality reductionAerospaceComputer scienceCoordinate-measuring machineArtificial intelligenceReduction (mathematics)Curse of dimensionalityProcess (computing)Automotive industryDimensional metrologyEngineering drawingComputer visionMechanical engineeringEngineeringMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The geometric measurement of parts using a coordinate measuring machine (CMM) has been generally adapted to the advanced automotive and aerospace industries. However, for the geometric inspection of deformable free-form parts, special inspection fixtures, in combination with CMM’s and/or optical data acquisition devices (scanners), are used. As a result, the geometric inspection of flexible parts is a consuming process in terms of time and money. The general procedure to eliminate the use of inspection fixtures based on distance preserving nonlinear dimensionality reduction (NLDR) technique was developed in our previous works. We sought out geometric properties that are invariant to inelastic deformations. In this paper we will only present a systematic comparison of some well-known dimensionality reduction techniques in order to evaluate their accuracy and potential for non-rigid metrology. We will demonstrate that even though these techniques may provide acceptable results through artificial data on certain fields like pattern recognition and machine learning, this performance cannot be extended to all real engineering metrology problems where high accuracy is needed.

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)0.002
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.150
Threshold uncertainty score0.452

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.321 · 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