MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4214877097 · doi:10.3390/cryst12030343

The Performance Prediction of Electrical Discharge Machining of AISI D6 Tool Steel Using ANN and ANFIS Techniques: A Comparative Study

2022· article· en· W4214877097 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCrystals · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Machining and Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Chicoutimi
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdaptive neuro fuzzy inference systemElectrical discharge machiningMachiningSurface roughnessArtificial neural networkVoltageMean squared errorProcess (computing)Mechanical engineeringEngineeringComputer scienceMaterials scienceFuzzy logicMachine learningMathematicsStatisticsFuzzy control systemArtificial intelligenceComposite materialElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AISI-D6 steel is widely used in the creation of dies and molds. In the present paper, first the electrical discharge machining (EDM) of the aforementioned material is performed with a testing plan of 32 trials. Then, artificial neural networks (ANN) and adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system (ANFIS) were applied to predict the outputs. The effects of some significant operational parameters—specifically pulse on-time (Ton), pulse current (I), and voltage (V)—on the performance measures of EDM processes such as the material removal rate (MRR), tool wear ratio (TWR), and average surface roughness (Ra) are extracted. To lead the process operators, process plans (i.e., parameter–effect correlations) are created. The outcomes exposed the upper values of pulse on-time caused by higher amounts of MRR and Ra, and likewise lower volumes of TWR. Furthermore, growing the pulse current resulted in upper volumes of the material removal rate, tool wear ratio, and surface roughness. Besides, the higher input voltage resulted in a lower amount of MRR, TWR, and Ra. The estimation models developed by using experimental data recounting MRR, TWR, and Ra. The root means the square error was used to determine the error of training models. Furthermore, the estimated outcomes based on the models have been proven with an unseen validation set of experiments. They are found to be in decent agreement with the experimental issues. The investigation shows the powerful learning capability of an ANFIS model and its advantage in terms of modeling complex linear machining 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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.299
Threshold uncertainty score0.330

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.248 · 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