MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2802252123 · doi:10.1139/tcsme-2002-0011

ENHANCED MODELING AND OPTIMIZATION OF MILLING USING A HYBRID TECHNIQUE

2002· article· en· W2802252123 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hazim El-Mounayri, Mohamed H. Gadallah, Jorge F. Briceno

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced machining processes and optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParticle swarm optimizationArtificial neural networkFractional factorial designDesign of experimentsComputer scienceProcess (computing)Factorial experimentOrthogonal arrayAlgorithmTaguchi methodsMathematicsArtificial intelligenceMachine learningStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Design, modeling, analysis, and optimization are steps necessary in production engineering today. In this paper, the flat end milling process is studied and modeled using a new approach. An Artificial Neural Network (ANN) Based model is developed that takes inputs in the form of cutting conditions and tool geometry parameters. Initially, three cutting parameters are varied in an arbitrary way; these are feed rate, spindle speed, and radial depth of cut. The inclusion of all cutting parameters can be done but would result in a dramatic increase in the number of experiments and cost of training. Accordingly, statistical design of experiments (D.E.O.) is employed to allow the change of variables using fractional factorial design (FFE), Several ANN models are developed from L90A, L270A, L27 OA with extended parameters ranges and L36 OA (9, 27, 27 (extended) and 36 experiments) arrays and the corresponding ANN models are compared with respect to accuracy of prediction. Nine confirmation experiments are carried out to validate the 4 new models. Another extension used combined models based on L54 OA and L63 OA respectively. Results indicate the potential of the employed techniques to accurately model the milling process in a fraction of the experiments previously conducted. Particle swarm optimization (PSO) is then used to minimize a cost function for the four reduced search spaces. Previous studies in areas of neural network based modeling in manufacturing are reviewed and conclusions are drawn.

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 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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.693
Threshold uncertainty score0.393

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.188 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

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

Citations1
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical EngineeringSame topicAdvanced machining processes and optimizationFrench-language works237,207