MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2885481053 · doi:10.1139/tcsme-2018-0006

Gear-tolerance optimization based on a response surface method

2018· article· en· W2885481053 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rui Xu, Kang Huang, Jun Guo, Lei Yang, Mingming Qiu, Ru Yan

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGear and Bearing Dynamics Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsTolerance analysisResponse surface methodologyOptimal designProcess (computing)Multi-objective optimizationTooth surfaceComputer scienceOptimization algorithmDisplacement (psychology)Mathematical optimizationEngineeringMathematicsMechanical engineeringEngineering drawing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To address the low efficiency of gear-tolerance analysis and optimization, a gear-tolerance optimization method based on a response surface method (RSM) and optimization algorithm is presented. A gear-tolerance mathematical model, including profile deviation, pitch deviation, and geometric deviation, was developed by combining traditional profile modeling with a small displacement torsor (SDT) method. Based on this mathematical model, a tooth-contact analysis method, which takes a variety of deviations into account, and a program to compute transmission error were developed. Using the RSM and a genetic algorithm, a gear-tolerance optimization model was created to consider a variety of gear tolerances as design variables and process cost as an optimization objective. An example of gear-tolerance optimization was analyzed, and the result indicates that the method presented in this paper may help improve the efficiency of gear-tolerance optimization and is practicable for precision gear design.

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 score0.817
Threshold uncertainty score0.450

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.213
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 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

Citations7
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical EngineeringSame topicGear and Bearing Dynamics AnalysisFrench-language works237,207