MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3211725161 · doi:10.1039/d1ra04060j

Additive manufacturing technology of polymeric materials for customized products: recent developments and future prospective

2021· review· en· W3211725161 on OpenAlexafffund
Akhilesh Kumar Pal, Amar K. Mohanty, Manjusri Misra

Bibliographic record

VenueRSC Advances · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdditive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCollege of Engineering, Michigan State UniversityOntario Ministry of Economic Development, Job Creation and TradeOntario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural AffairsMinistero dello Sviluppo EconomicoUniversity of GuelphMinistry of Agriculture, Food and Rural AffairsMichigan State University
KeywordsManufacturing engineeringManufacturing processProcess (computing)Process engineeringComputer scienceNanotechnologyBiochemical engineeringEngineeringMaterials scienceComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The worldwide demand for additive manufacturing (AM) is increasing due to its ability to produce more challenging customized objects based on the process parameters for engineering applications. The processing of conventional materials by AM processes is a critically demanded research stream, which has generated a path-breaking scenario in the rapid manufacturing and upcycling of plastics. The exponential growth of AM in the worldwide polymer market is expected to exceed 20 billion US dollars by 2021 in areas of automotive, medical, aerospace, energy and customized consumer products. The development of functional polymers and composites by 3D printing-based technologies has been explored significantly due to its cost-effective, easier integration into customized geometries, higher efficacy, higher precision, freedom of material utilization as compared to traditional injection molding, and thermoforming techniques. Since polymers are the most explored class of materials in AM to overcome the limitations, this review describes the latest research conducted on petroleum-based polymers and their composites using various AM techniques such as fused filament fabrication (FFF), selective laser sintering (SLS), and stereolithography (SLA) related to 3D printing in engineering applications such as biomedical, automotive, aerospace and electronics.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations149
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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