Toward Sub-Surface Pore Prediction Capabilities for Laser Powder Bed Fusion Using Data Science
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Achieving defect-free parts is traditionally challenging in laser powder bed fusion (LPBF). The mechanical properties of additively manufactured parts are highly affected by their density; as such, research in defect detection and pore prediction has gained significant interest. The process parameters, the powder characteristics, and the process environment conditions play an important role in defect occurrence. Moreover, the laser scan path affects density, especially at scan path discontinuities. In this work, the complex interaction between the process parameters and the scan path on the occurrence of subsurface pores is investigated. In the data preparation step, a synthetic data set is generated to model the melt pool morphology along the scan path. A secondary data set containing the pore space of the resulting parts is obtained via X-ray computed tomography (CT) and is registered with the synthetic data set. Machine learning models, namely, a Conditional Variational AutoEncoder (CVAE) and a Convolutional Neural Network (CNN), are then trained based on the input features to predict pore occurrence. The performance evaluation of both CNN and CVAE models on synthetic data indicates that the scan path and process parameters can be utilized in predicting pore locations. Quantitative results show that employing offline CT images a priori in training the CVAE, without the need to have CT information in the test phase, leads the CVAE model to superior performance over the CNN.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".