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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Various relevant patents and papers which have reported noncircular gears synthesize the advantages of circular gears and cam mechanisms, and are widely used in many types of mechanical instruments. Hobbing is a better method for fabricating noncircular gears. There are 4 linkagemethods to hob noncircular gears. However, which linkage method should be chosen practically has not yet been reported. Objective: The goal of this work is to choose the best linkage method for hobbing noncircular gears. Method: Firstly, the hobbing models of noncircular gears was deduced. Then, based on the model, hobbing linkage methods of noncircular gears were obtained. Thirdly, under different hobbing linkage methods, their aspects (developing regularity of hobbing cutter trace, arc length of program blocks and motion axes of machine tools) were compared. Results: Finally, with the best characteristics of a high density of shaping cutter trace, high uniformity of arc length of program blocks and ease of control, the equal arc-length of gear billet (EALGB) is obtained. It has been proven that EALGB is an excellent linkage method to hob noncircular gears. Conclusion: It has been proven that EALGB is an excellent linkage method to hob noncircular gears.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it