MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2604035261 · doi:10.5267/j.dsl.2017.1.004

Multi-objective optimization of PMEDM using response surface methodology coupled with fuzzy based desirability function approach

2017· article· en· W2604035261 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Munmun Bhaumik, Kalipada Maity

Bibliographic record

VenueDecision Science Letters · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering Applied Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResponse surface methodologyFuzzy logicFunction (biology)Mathematical optimizationMulti-objective optimizationMaterials scienceComputer scienceMathematicsArtificial intelligenceMachine learningBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Powder mixed electro discharge machining (PMEDM) is a hybrid machining process where the electrically conductive powder is mixed into the dielectric fluid to enhance the machining efficiency as well as surface finish. In this investigation, PMEDM is performed for the machining of AISI 304 stainless steel when silicon carbide powder is mixed into the kerosene dielectric. Peak current, pulse on time, gap voltage, duty cycle and powder concentration are considered as process parameter while material removal rate (MRR), tool wear rate (TWR) and surface roughness (Ra) are considered as response. A face centered central composite design (FCCCD) based response surface methodology (RSM) is applied to design the experiment. A hybrid optimization technique like desirability coupled with fuzzy-logic method is performed to get the optimum level of the multiple performance characteristics. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) is performed for the statistical analysis. The result shows that peak current is the most significant parameter for MRR, TWR and Ra. The optimal setting for maximum MRR, minimum TWR and Ra have been obtained by desirability coupled with fuzzy-logic method.

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)0.003
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.117
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations14
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDecision Science LettersSame topicEngineering Applied ResearchFrench-language works237,207