MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2199783880 · doi:10.3390/s151229905

Cloud-Based Automated Design and Additive Manufacturing: A Usage Data-Enabled Paradigm Shift

2015· article· en· W2199783880 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Dirk Lehmhus, Thorsten Wuest, Stefan Wellsandt, Stefan Bosse, Toshiya Kaihara, Klaus‐Dieter Thoben, Matthias Busse

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdditive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCouncil for Science, Technology and InnovationUniversität BremenEuropean CommissionYork University
KeywordsAdaptation (eye)Cloud computingPaceCloud manufacturingProduct (mathematics)Systems engineeringComputer scienceManufacturing engineeringStakeholderDistributed manufacturingScale (ratio)Product designNew product developmentEngineeringIndustrial engineeringData scienceProcess managementBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Integration of sensors into various kinds of products and machines provides access to in-depth usage information as basis for product optimization. Presently, this large potential for more user-friendly and efficient products is not being realized because (a) sensor integration and thus usage information is not available on a large scale and (b) product optimization requires considerable efforts in terms of manpower and adaptation of production equipment. However, with the advent of cloud-based services and highly flexible additive manufacturing techniques, these obstacles are currently crumbling away at rapid pace. The present study explores the state of the art in gathering and evaluating product usage and life cycle data, additive manufacturing and sensor integration, automated design and cloud-based services in manufacturing. By joining and extrapolating development trends in these areas, it delimits the foundations of a manufacturing concept that will allow continuous and economically viable product optimization on a general, user group or individual user level. This projection is checked against three different application scenarios, each of which stresses different aspects of the underlying holistic concept. The following discussion identifies critical issues and research needs by adopting the relevant stakeholder perspectives.

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)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.006
Open science0.0020.002
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations73
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicAdditive Manufacturing and 3D Printing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207