Performance of a five-axis machine tool as a coordinate measuring machine (CMM)
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
The use of machine tools for on-machine coordinate measurement on the workpiece is becoming commonplace. However, numerous errors can adversely affect the measurement accuracy. For instance, the inter-axis parameters are major contributors to the overall machine tool's inaccuracy hence estimation and compensation of such errors are prerequisite to fully exploit the machine's measurement capability. This paper presents a scheme to assess the accuracy of coordinate measurement by probing a precision sphere mounted on the machine table for different rotary axes indexations. Only the sphericity of the reference sphere is assumed and neither its size nor position. All individual probing data from all indexations are used for the assessment of the apparent out of sphericity of the reference sphere. Machine readings are processed either directly, using the machine nominal model, or using a compensated model. This provides a fast method to validate on-machine measurement before and after compensation with the exception of isotropic scale effects.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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