MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2942517280 · doi:10.1109/access.2019.2914697

Multi-Objective Optimization of Manufacturing Process in Carbon Fiber Industry Using Artificial Intelligence Techniques

2019· article· en· W2942517280 on OpenAlexaff
Gelayol Golkarnarenji, Minoo Naebe, Khashayar Badii, Abbas S. Milani, Ali Jamali, Alireza Bab‐Hadiashar, Reza N. Jazar, Hamid Khayyam

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Multi-Objective Optimization Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersDeakin University
KeywordsComputer scienceTOPSISEnergy consumptionIdeal solutionMulti-objective optimizationProfitability indexMathematical optimizationProcess (computing)Efficient energy useProcess engineeringIndustrial engineeringEngineeringMathematicsOperations researchMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Seeking high profitability by improving energy efficiency and production quality is the prime goal of manufacturing industries. However, achieving this aim involves the realization of several conflicting objectives. In carbon fiber industry, the stabilization process is the most vital step with high energy consumption. The aim of this study is to use intelligent modeling methods in the stabilization process to maximize energy efficiency while considering better production quality, avoiding defects, and not scarifying the prediction accuracy. To this aim, a modified DOE method was used to reduce the number of required experiments. The mechanical and physical properties were then modeled based on input-output data derived from the experiments. In this way, the SVR method is used to develop a set of mathematical models for mechanical and physical properties of the fibers. The skin-core defect and energy consumption were considered as objective functions within the given range of physical and mechanical properties of fibers. The state-of-the-art NSGA-II algorithm used to find the optimum Pareto front, including non-dominated solutions among these conflicting objective functions. The results showed that by using the integrated NSGA-II and technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS), the energy efficiency of the system was improved. Moreover, the discussions showed how similar hybrid algorithms with high accuracy can be used by other industries to reduce the overall energy consumptions.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.301 · 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

Citations20
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicAdvanced Multi-Objective Optimization AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207