Comparative Prediction and Modelling of Surface Roughness in Milling of AL-7075 Using Regression Analysis and Neural Network
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The surface roughness (Ra) of machine parts effects significantly the fatigue strength, corrosion resistance and aesthetic appeal of them. Therefore, Ra is an important parameter in manufacturing process. In this research, Ra of Aluminum Al-7075 in milling process is predicted and minimized. Ra minimization has to be in standard mathematical model formula. In order to predict minimum Ra value, developing a model is taken to deal with real Ra experimental data of the milling process. Two model approaches which are Regression and Artificial Neural Network (ANN) are proposed for minimum Ra value prediction. The studied process parameters were: speed of cut, feed rate and depth of cut. Regression and ANN were used to investigate the effect of these parameters on Ra through 27 cases of study, where full Analysis of Ra besides to determining regression equation and optimum process parameters are achieved. This study results show that each of Regression & ANN models had reduced minimum Ra in very similar value by 0.987. This similarity reflects the promise approach of this study in predicting Ra in AL-7075 milling, unlike previous studies that either the regression or the Artificial intelligence method was the dominant in results.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".