MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2566081284 · doi:10.1515/meceng-2016-0028

Measurement Accuracy Investigation of Touch Trigger Probe with Five-Axis Machine Tools

2016· article· en· W2566081284 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueArchive of Mechanical Engineering · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Measurement and Metrology Techniques
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaConsortium de Recherche et d’innovation en Aérospatiale au Québec
KeywordsCoordinate-measuring machineRepeatabilityMetrologyMachine toolComputer scienceAccuracy and precisionAsideCrashSurface metrologySimulationMechanical engineeringArtificial intelligenceEngineeringOpticsPhysicsProfilometer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The touch trigger probe plays an important role in modern metrology because of its robust and compact design with crash protection, long life and excellent repeatability. Aside from coordinate measuring machines (CMM), touch trigger probes are used for workpiece location on a machine tool and for the accuracy assessment of the machine tools. As a result, the accuracy of the measurement is a matter of interest to the users. The touch trigger probe itself as well as the measuring surface, the machine tool, measuring environment etc. contribute to measurement inaccuracies. The paper presents the effect of surface irregularities, surface wetness due to cutting fluid and probing direction on probing accuracy on a machine tool.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.831
Threshold uncertainty score0.515

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.192 · 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