MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200616504 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-1054589/v1

The Use of Wavelet Transform To Evaluate The Sensitivity of Acoustic Emission Attributes To Variation of Cutting Parameters in Milling Aluminium Alloys

2021· preprint· en· W4200616504 on OpenAlexafffund
Reza Asadi, Mohamad Javad Anahid, Hoda Heydarnia, Hedayeh Mehmanparast, Seyed Ali Niknam

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced machining processes and optimization
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalUniversity of British Columbia
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAcoustic emissionSIGNAL (programming language)WaveletSignal processingWavelet transformSensitivity (control systems)Cutting toolComputer scienceProcess (computing)MachiningPattern recognition (psychology)Materials scienceEngineeringArtificial intelligenceMechanical engineeringElectronic engineeringDigital signal processingComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Appropriate acquisition and assessment of the dominant acoustic emission (AE) signal attributes generated under various experimental cutting conditions may provide significant knowledge. Consequently, it enhances the efficiency in manufacturing process monitoring and control. However, according to the literature, a lack of information was noticed on the behavior of AE signal attributes under various cutting conditions. Considering that milling is among the most widely used machining operations, the aim of this investigation is to acquire adequate knowledge about interactions between cutting parameters and their direct and indirect effects on the obtained AE signals attributes from the milling process. In the course of this work, the effects of cutting conditions on the attributes calculated from wavelet transform (WT) of AE signals will be presented. WT signal processing was conducted with five models of mother wavelets, and appropriate decomposition numbers were deployed. The approximated signal attributes obtained from each decomposition were assessed. According to signal processing and statistical calculations, cutting speed, feed rate, and coating significantly impacted the variation of AE signal attributes. Also, the most sensitive AE signal attributes and decompositions were rms, std, entropy and energy, and 2nd and 6th decompositions, respectively. The outcome of this work can be integrated into advanced artificial intelligence (AI) approaches to implement real-time monitoring of manufacturing processes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.441
Threshold uncertainty score0.476

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch SquareSame topicAdvanced machining processes and optimizationFrench-language works237,207