MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312687135 · doi:10.1115/detc2022-88458

Additive Manufacturing Strategy for Ultra-Lightweight High Value-Added Components

2022· article· en· W4312687135 on OpenAlexaff
Louis Catar, Ilyass Tabiai, David St-Onge

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdditive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceManufacturing engineeringRationalization (economics)PersonalizationFlexibility (engineering)Process (computing)Added valueMass customizationKey (lock)Systems engineeringIndustrial engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Additive manufacturing and its growth in advanced industrial fields are changing many process paradigms for the development of highly customizable components. It condenses the traditional approaches to produce assemblies that are more and more integrated at different levels: functionality (strength, lightness), productivity (flexibility, customization) and development (passage from the digital part to the final part). This work presents a methodology to help select a combination of possibilities (materials, process, etc.). Derived from the double diamond method, this methodology aims to propose a rationalization of the choices available to designers of high value-added products with strict and mutually intertwined requirements. The whole methodology is then illustrated with the design of an indoor aerostat drone which illustrates the implementation of some of the key elements of the proposed process.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.222
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdditive Manufacturing and 3D Printing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207