MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2335149273 · doi:10.1115/detc2015-48008

A Finite Element Approach to Estimate the Detailed Deviation Zone in Coordinate Metrology

2015· article· en· W2335149273 on OpenAlexaff
Amirali Lalehpour, Ahmad Barari, Saeed Jamiolahmadi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Measurement and Metrology Techniques
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetrologyCoordinate-measuring machineStandard deviationSurface metrologyFinite element methodSurface (topology)Process (computing)Dimensional metrologyPoint (geometry)Compensation (psychology)Coordinate systemComputer scienceMeasurement uncertaintyAlgorithmMechanical engineeringMathematicsEngineeringProfilometerGeometryStructural engineeringComputer visionStatisticsSurface finish

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The exact detailed knowledge of deviation zone in a manufactured surface needs measurement of infinite number of points when the coordinate metrology is utilized. The coordinate metrology process provides deviation of the limited number of discrete points on a measured surface, but typically the process is not capable to explore any information of the surface regions between these measured points. A Finite Element approach for Deviation Zone Evaluation (DZE) on the entire inspected surface is presented in this paper. The developed DZE solution estimates the deviation values at any unmeasured point of the inspected surface when a detailed understanding of the surface geometric deviations is required. Implementation of the developed methodology is described and case study for typical industrial parts is presented. This methodology can be used for closed-loop of inspection and manufacturing processes when a compensation scheme is available to compensate the manufacturing errors based on the DZE data.

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 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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.896
Threshold uncertainty score0.323

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Measurement and Metrology TechniquesFrench-language works237,207