MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4289885505 · doi:10.1093/jcde/qwac076

A geometric modelling framework to support the design of heterogeneous lattice structures with non-linearly varying geometry

2022· article· en· W4289885505 on OpenAlexafffund
Nikita Letov, Yaoyao Fiona Zhao

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Computational Design and Engineering · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdditive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMcGill University
KeywordsGeometric designGeometric modelingLattice (music)SoftwareComputer Aided DesignComputer scienceGeometric shapeRepresentation (politics)Geometric networksMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Geometric modelling has been a crucial component of the design process ever since the introduction of the first computer-aided design systems. Additive Manufacturing (AM) pushes design freedom to previously unachievable limits. AM allows the manufacturing of lattice structures which are otherwise close to impossible to be manufactured conventionally. Yet, the geometric modelling of heterogeneous lattice structures is still greatly limited. Thus, the AM industry is now in a situation where the manufacturing capabilities exceed the geometric modelling capabilities. While there have been advancements in the modelling of heterogeneous lattice structures, the review of relevant literature revealed critical limitations of the existing approaches. These limitations include their inability to model non-linear variation of geometric parameters, as well as the limited amount of controllable geometric parameters. This work presents a novel geometric modelling methodology based on function representation as an attempt to bridge this gap. The proposed approach avoids the manual definition of geometric parameters and provides a method to control them with mathematical functions instead. A software prototype implementing the proposed approach is presented, and several use-cases are analysed.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations29
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Computational Design and EngineeringSame topicAdditive Manufacturing and 3D Printing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207