MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2463123820 · doi:10.1177/0954405416654184

Predicting the remaining useful life of a cutting tool during turning titanium metal matrix composites

2016· article· en· W2463123820 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

VenueProceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part B Journal of Engineering Manufacture · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReliability and Maintenance Optimization
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMachiningAerospaceReliability (semiconductor)Computer scienceHazardReliability engineeringTitanium alloyMechanical engineeringMaterials scienceEngineeringComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A cutting tool’s remaining useful life is what is left for a tool, at a particular working age, in order to reach a pre-specified level of acceptable performance. The prediction of remaining useful life is crucial in order to decrease the scrapped products or the unnecessary interruption of the machining process in order to replace the tool. Consequently, the accuracy of its estimation affects the cost of machining, particularly when the product’s material is very expensive. In this article, the remaining useful lifes of 25 identical tools are estimated during turning titanium metal matrix composites. These composites are extensively used in aerospace and aviation industries. Accurate estimation of the remaining useful life has positive impact on product quality in terms of producing the required specifications. In this article, experimental data are gathered, and the proportional hazard model are used in order to model the tool’s reliability and hazard functions with EXAKT software and then the remaining useful life curves are developed for different machining conditions, namely, the cutting speed and the feed rate. The use of the proportional hazard model is validated using a normalization process and Kolmogorov–Smirnov test. The proportionality assumption is verified using log minus log plot. The final result is the development of the curves that represent the tools’ reliability and the remaining useful life for different machining conditions of the titanium metal matrix composites.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.525
Threshold uncertainty score0.599

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.185
Teacher spread0.179 · 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