MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3201608171 · doi:10.3390/polym13193219

Modeling the Producibility of 3D Printing in Polylactic Acid Using Artificial Neural Networks and Fused Filament Fabrication

2021· article· en· W3201608171 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad Saleh Meiabadi, Mahmoud Moradi, Mojtaba Karamimoghadam, Sina Ardabili, Mahdi Bodaghi, Manouchehr Shokri, Amir Mosavi

Bibliographic record

VenuePolymers · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdditive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersAlexander von Humboldt-Stiftung
KeywordsFused filament fabricationPolylactic acidArtificial neural networkMaterials scienceFabricationToughness3D printingUltimate tensile strengthComposite materialFused deposition modelingPlastics extrusionRapid prototypingComputer scienceMechanical engineeringPolymerArtificial intelligenceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Polylactic acid (PLA) is a highly applicable material that is used in 3D printers due to some significant features such as its deformation property and affordable cost. For improvement of the end-use quality, it is of significant importance to enhance the quality of fused filament fabrication (FFF)-printed objects in PLA. The purpose of this investigation was to boost toughness and to reduce the production cost of the FFF-printed tensile test samples with the desired part thickness. To remove the need for numerous and idle printing samples, the response surface method (RSM) was used. Statistical analysis was performed to deal with this concern by considering extruder temperature (ET), infill percentage (IP), and layer thickness (LT) as controlled factors. The artificial intelligence method of artificial neural network (ANN) and ANN-genetic algorithm (ANN-GA) were further developed to estimate the toughness, part thickness, and production-cost-dependent variables. Results were evaluated by correlation coefficient and RMSE values. According to the modeling results, ANN-GA as a hybrid machine learning (ML) technique could enhance the accuracy of modeling by about 7.5, 11.5, and 4.5% for toughness, part thickness, and production cost, respectively, in comparison with those for the single ANN method. On the other hand, the optimization results confirm that the optimized specimen is cost-effective and able to comparatively undergo deformation, which enables the usability of printed PLA objects.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations71
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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