MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285596786 · doi:10.3390/machines10070567

Assessment of Surface Roughness in Milling of Beech Using a Response Surface Methodology and an Adaptive Network-Based Fuzzy Inference System

2022· article· en· W4285596786 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

VenueMachines · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced machining processes and optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsBeechMachiningSurface roughnessRake angleSmoothnessSurface finishAdaptive neuro fuzzy inference systemSurface (topology)Materials scienceFuzzy logicWork (physics)Computer scienceMechanical engineeringEngineering drawingProcess engineeringMathematicsComposite materialEngineeringFuzzy control systemGeometryMetallurgyArtificial intelligenceMathematical analysisGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work focused on changes in surface roughness under different cutting conditions for improving the cutting quality of beech wood during milling. A response surface methodology and an adaptive network-based fuzzy inference system were adopted to model and establish the relationship between milling conditions and surface roughness. Moreover, the significant impact of each factor and two-factor interactions on surface roughness were explored by analysis of variance. The specific objective of this work was to find milling parameters for minimum surface roughness, and the optimal milling condition was determined to be a rake angle of 15°, a spindle speed of 3357 r/min and a depth of cut of 0.62 mm. These parameters are suggested to be used in actual machining of beech wood with respect of smoothness surface.

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)0.001
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 score0.083
Threshold uncertainty score0.580

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.293 · 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