MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162219390 · doi:10.1109/cca.2009.5280821

Multi-objective optimal gating and riser design for metal-casting

2009· article· en· W2162219390 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
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Multi-Objective Optimization Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlexibility (engineering)CastingComputer scienceMulti-objective optimizationGatingProcess (computing)Key (lock)Evolutionary algorithmMathematical optimizationOptimal designEngineering design processEngineeringMechanical engineeringMaterials scienceMathematicsMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The gating and riser design plays an important role in the quality and cost of a metal casting. Due to the lack of existing theoretical procedures to follow, the design process is normally carried out on a trial-and-error basis. In this paper, the casting design is first formulated as a multi-objective optimization problem with conflicting objectives and a complex search space. An optimization method using multi-objective evolutionary algorithm (MOEA) is developed to overcome such complexities. A framework for integrating the optimization procedure driven by data for the design evaluation is then presented. The proposed optimization framework is applied to the gating and riser design of a sand casting. It is shown that the MOEA method yields good results and provides more flexibility in decision making.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.257
Threshold uncertainty score0.752

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.258 · 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