MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2548006637 · doi:10.1139/tcsme-2010-0017

COMBINING TAGUCHI METHOD, PRINCIPAL COMPONENT ANALYSIS AND FUZZY LOGIC TO THE TOLERANCE DESIGN OF A DUAL-PURPOSE SIX-BAR MECHANISM

2010· article· en· W2548006637 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Fu‐Chen Chen, Yih-Fong Tzeng, Meng-Hui Hsu, Wei‐Ren Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicManufacturing Process and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Science Council
KeywordsTaguchi methodsPrincipal component analysisFuzzy logicBar (unit)Mechanism (biology)Dual (grammatical number)Tolerance analysisComponent (thermodynamics)Computer scienceOrthogonal arrayKey (lock)EngineeringEngineering drawingArtificial intelligenceMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A hybrid approach of combining Taguchi method, principal component analysis and fuzzy logic for the tolerance design of a dual-purpose six-bar mechanism is proposed. The approach is to firstly use the Taguchi orthogonal array to carry out experiments for calculating the S/N ratios of the positional errors to the angular error of the dual-purpose six-bar mechanism. The principal component analysis is then applied to determine the principal components of the S/N ratios, which are transformed via fuzzy logic reasoning into a multiple performance index (MPI) for further analysis of the effect of each control factors on the quality of the mechanism. Through the analysis of response table and diagram, key dimensional tolerances can be classified, which allows the decision of either to tighten the key tolerances to improve mechanism quality or to relax the tolerance of non-key dimensions to reduce manufacturing costs to be made.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

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

Citations15
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical EngineeringSame topicManufacturing Process and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207