Is 3D Printing Transforming the Project Management Function in the Aerospace Industry
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Traditional manufacturing techniques fade into the background, while manufacturing systems require using additive technologies for rapid adaptation to current demand and reduction of production cycle duration. Many large mechanical and aircraft engineering companies have already adopted additive manufacturing technologies in their future production strategy. The general concept of 3D printers on the basis of e-manufacturing principles is aimed at the integration of computer models of physical objects and processes. This change requires a big transformation of the enterprise business model, affecting either core or support activities. For instance, additive manufacturing could also change project management practices. This paper aims to identify how additive manifacturing could transform the project management function for the aerospace industry. Results show that projects could improve their performance by integrating additive manufacturing; however, project managers could adapt their approach to a new paradigm for lifecycle management and for leaner supply chain management in aerospace industry.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it