MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4295253178 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2108.13526

Computational Design of Active 3D-Printed Multi-State Structures for\n Shape Morphing

2021· preprint· W4295253178 on OpenAlexaff
Thomas S. Lumpe, Michael Tao, Kristina Shea, David Levin

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2021
Typepreprint
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicTopology Optimization in Engineering
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMorphingComputer scienceCompliant mechanismTopology optimizationDitherControl engineeringMechanical engineeringEngineering drawingFinite element methodEngineeringStructural engineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Active structures have the ability to change their shape, properties, and\nfunctionality as a response to changing operational conditions, which makes\nthem more versatile than their static counterparts. However, most active\nstructures currently lack the capability to achieve multiple, different target\nstates with a single input actuation or require a tedious material programming\nstep. Furthermore, the systematic design and fabrication of active structures\nis still a challenge as many structures are designed by hand in a trial and\nerror process and thus are limited by engineers' knowledge and experience. In\nthis work, a computational design and fabrication framework is proposed to\ngenerate structures with multiple target states for one input actuation that\ndon't require a separate training step. A material dithering scheme based on\nmulti-material 3D printing is combined with locally applied copper coil heating\nelements and sequential heating patterns to control the thermo-mechanical\nproperties of the structures and switch between the different deformation\nmodes. A novel topology optimization approach based on power diagrams is used\nto encode the different target states in the structure while ensuring the\nfabricability of the structures and the compatibility with the drop-in heating\nelements. The versatility of the proposed framework is demonstrated for four\ndifferent example structures from engineering and computer graphics. The\nnumerical and experimental results show that the optimization framework can\nproduce structures that show the desired motion, but experimental accuracy is\nlimited by current fabrication methods. The generality of the proposed method\nmakes it suitable for the development of structures for applications in many\ndifferent fields from aerospace to robotics to animated fabrication in computer\ngraphics.\n

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.617
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.136 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicTopology Optimization in EngineeringFrench-language works237,207