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 OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

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.

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 score0.454
Threshold uncertainty score0.916

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.045
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