Application of desirability function for optimizing the performance characteristics of carbonitrided bushes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The performance of a product is generally characterized by more than one response variable. Hence the management often faces the problem of simultaneous optimization of many response variables. This study was undertaken to simultaneously optimize the surface hardness and case depth of carbonitrided bushes. Even though lots of literature has been published on various methodologies for tackling the multi-response optimization problem, the simultaneous optimization of heat treated properties of carbonitrided bushes are not reported yet. In this research the effect of four factors and two interactions on surface hardness and case depth of carbontirded bushes were studied using design of experiments. Based on the experimental results, the expected values of the heat treated properties of the bushes were estimated for all possible combination of factors. Then the best combination which, simultaneously optimized the response variables, was arrived at using desirability function. The study showed that the optimum combination obtained through desirability function approach not only minimized the variation around the targets of surface hardness and case depth but also was superior to the ones obtained by optimizing the response variables separately. Moreover this study provides a useful and effective approach to design the production process to manufacture bushes with customer specified surface hardness and case depth targets.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".