MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2998094944 · doi:10.2514/6.2020-0893

Assembly Level Topology Optimization Towards a Part Consolidation Algorithm for Additive Manufacturing

2020· article· en· W2998094944 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

VenueAIAA Scitech 2020 Forum · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicManufacturing Process and Optimization
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTopology optimizationAerospaceConsolidation (business)Computer scienceHeuristicMathematical optimizationDesign space explorationDomain (mathematical analysis)Topology (electrical circuits)Manufacturing engineeringEngineeringMathematicsFinite element methodStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As the adoption of additive manufacturing continues to grow in the aerospace industry, part consolidation is an emerging design technique aimed at decreasing assembly cost. Significant research is focused on design for additive manufacturing principles and their integration into design generation tools such as topology optimization, while part consolidation research has been limited to heuristic guidelines. This work presents the extension of topology optimization to assembly design for the simultaneous optimization of structural performance and connection layout. This methodology uses multiple domains occupying the same space along with a single joining domain to represent the assembly design. The proposed approach allows for future extensions with the calculation of additive manufacturing part costs on an individual domain level. The methodology is tested on a numerical example demonstrating the variation in part geometry and number of parts as the emphasis on joining cost is varied.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.595
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.238
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