MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2991480939 · doi:10.1115/detc2019-98456

Geometric Complexity Estimation of Continuous Surfaces for Fitting Processes

2019· article· en· W2991480939 on OpenAlexaff
Hossein Gohari, Ahmad Barari

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdditive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNormalization (sociology)Flexibility (engineering)Computational complexity theoryGeometric modelingComputer scienceMeasure (data warehouse)Computational geometryGeometric designAlgorithmCurvatureConvergence (economics)Mathematical optimizationSurface (topology)MathematicsGeometryData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The advances in manufacturing methods such as Additive manufacturing provide more flexibility in fabrication of complex geometries. Meanwhile, design tools such as aesthetic design and topology optimization algorithms have been implemented in industrial applications mostly due to the provided flexibility to manufacture freeform surfaces. Computational time and efficiency of the developed algorithms for design, manufacturing and inspection are heavily dependent on the geometric complexity of surfaces. In this paper a measure to estimate the geometric complexity is introduced based on the inherent property of a surface which is curvature. A quantitative value for the geometric complexity is defined through normalization and integration of the mean curvatures. Case studies of the implementation of the proposed measure of complexity verifies the ability of the method to predict the convergence of a surface fitting algorithm based on the geometric complexity of the input model.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.835
Threshold uncertainty score0.271

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdditive Manufacturing and 3D Printing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207