MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3100119367 · doi:10.1115/detc2001/cie-21301

Steepest-Directed Tool Paths of Sculptured Parts: The Most Efficient Local Scheme in 3-Axis CNC Machining and its Mathematical Proof

2001· article· en· W3100119367 on OpenAlexaff
Zezhong C. Chen, Zuomin Dong, G. W. Vickers

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Numerical Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMachiningTool pathPath (computing)Numerical controlScheme (mathematics)Computer scienceAlgorithmEngineering drawingMechanical engineeringMathematicsEngineeringMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Three-axis CNC milling is often used in sculptured parts machining. Due to the complex shape of the part surfaces, optimal tool path planning can significantly improve machining efficiency. In this work the mechanism of 3-axis CNC machining is examined. The generic formulae of steepest direction of sculptured surface are derived. A mathematical proof of the highest machining efficiency of steepest-directed tool path is provided. The most efficient local scheme, steepest-directed tool path in tool path planning, is proposed. This scheme serves as a theoretical base for applying steepest-directed tool path in tool path generation algorithms for 3-axis CNC machining. The tool path has been used to develop the steepest-directed and iso-cusped (SDIC) tool path generation algorithm. An example of SDIC tool paths of a half-cylinder part illustrates the application of steepest-directed tool path.

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)0.000
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Numerical Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207