Economic quality design under model uncertainty in micro-drilling manufacturing process
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Integrated parameter design and tolerance design (IPTD) is an effective way to improve product quality and reduce manufacturing cost in micro-manufacturing processes. However, the current modeling techniques rarely analyze the influence of model uncertainty on the optimal machining parameters. It may not obtain the robust optimal machining parameters due to model uncertainty. This paper proposes a novel economically integrated design method which considers the correlations among quality characteristics, the variability of manufacturing process, and uncertainty in the model predictions. First, a new rework and scrap cost functions are established via Monte Carlo simulation. Meanwhile, an integrative expected quality loss function is constructed based on interval analysis theory for quantifying model uncertainty. Second, to make the proposed method closer to the practical micro-manufacturing problem, we consider the trade-offs among cost, time, and success rate in the modeling process. Finally, a total cost model is proposed to take into account the quality loss, tolerance cost, unit manufacturing cost, and scrap cost. The effectiveness of the proposed modeling method is verified by a laser beam micro-drilling manufacturing. The results illustrate that the proposed method can achieve better robustness property and economically than the traditional method that does not consider model uncertainty.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".