Impact of additive manufacturing on maritime transportation: a review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose Although additive manufacturing (AM; 3D printing/3DP) is presently in its infancy, once it becomes economically viable for mass production, it would revolutionize the operation and supply chain network of traditional businesses and manufacturing industries. To this end, approaches for ensuring a smooth transition of the economy, businesses, manufacturing centers and related services are being investigated. This review paper assesses the existing literature on the impact of AM on the maritime transportation sector. Design/methodology/approach This paper provides a systematic literature review through three methodological phases: (1) a comprehensive review of the number of English language literature studies published on the topics of AM or 3DP (1970–2021); (2) a bibliometric analysis of selected keyword combinations and (3) a detailed review on the impact of AM on different sectors. Findings The key findings are that existing studies do not attempt to forecast shipping volume and ton-miles that can be affected by the mainstreaming of the technology. Additionally, existing literature that focuses on the impact of the technology on different shipping categories is limited to studies on container ships. Originality/value The review identifies some potential areas of research that since maritime transportation will be affected by mainstreaming AM, it will have economic, social and environmental impacts on global trade that require future assessment.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".