MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2547344027 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2016.7726783

Machine learning for quality prediction in abrasion-resistant material manufacturing process

2016· article· en· W2547344027 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced machining processes and optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProcess (computing)Computer scienceAbrasion (mechanical)Quality (philosophy)Support vector machineProduct (mathematics)Machine learningManufacturing engineeringProcess engineeringArtificial intelligenceEngineeringMechanical engineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quality monitoring and prediction plays a key role in improving product quality and achieving automated quality control in manufacturing processes such as the abrasion-resistant material manufacturing process. Traditional methods that rely on the use of first-principle models are difficult to formulate due to the increasing complexity and high dimensionality of manufacturing processes. Data-driven machine learning methods offer an efficient way to learn models for quality prediction, in which the meaningful process information can be learned directly from large amounts of measured process data at different stages. In this paper, based on data collected throughout an abrasion-resistant material manufacturing process, product quality prediction of burned balls is achieved with the use of the Support Vector Machine classification algorithm.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.659
Threshold uncertainty score0.297

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.253 · 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