MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210676435 · doi:10.32920/19067294

The Impact of Learning on the Selection of Cost-Effective Machining and Production Process

2022· preprint· en· W4210676435 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad Irtiza Hossain

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicManufacturing Process and Optimization
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMachiningProduction (economics)Manufacturing engineeringProcess (computing)Selection (genetic algorithm)Computer scienceLearning curveIndustrial engineeringMachine toolNumerical controlEngineeringMechanical engineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Informed production decision-making requires a structured understanding of the production process and costs associated. This research proposes a decision support system incorporating the learning effects on selecting cost-effective machining production process. The approach is applied to the case on manufacturing wind turbine blades. The machining industry has experienced a surge in demand for complex machining applications and an availability of a wide range of new machining technologies. Producing complex structures requires experienced CNC programmers that perform extensive strategy planning, design and optimization. The system developed considers the production processes, cost items, power learning curve and experience of the programmers. This enables managers to evaluate between various production processes and select the most cost-efficient process. An analytical approach to evaluate cost efficiency between 3-axis CNC and 5-axis CNC machines. The result is a user-friendly planning and selection tool aiding in answering critical managerial questions related to cost-effectiveness.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.035
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.035
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.255 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicManufacturing Process and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207