Normalization and Dimension Reduction for Machine Learning in Advanced Manufacturing
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract With the advances in sensing and communication techniques, data collection has become much easier in manufacturing processes. Machine learning (ML) is a vital tool for manufacturing data analytics to leverage the underlying informatics carried by data. However, the varieties of data formats, dimensionality, and manufacturing types hugely hinder the learning efficiency of ML methods. Data preparation is critical for exploiting the potential of ML in manufacturing problems. This paper investigates how data preparation affects the ML efficacy in manufacturing data. Specifically, we study the influences of data normalization and dimension reduction on the ML performance for various types of manufacturing problems. We conduct comparison studies of data with/without pre-processing on different manufacturing processes, such as casting, milling, and additive manufacturing. Experimental results reveal that different pre-processing methods have a distinct effect on learning efficiency. Normalization is helpful for both numerical and image data, while dimension reduction — this paper uses principal component analysis (PCA) — is not useful for low-dimensional numerical manufacturing data. Combining both normalization and PCA can significantly enhance the learning efficiency of high-dimensional data. After that, we summarize several practical guidelines for manufacturing data preparation for ML, which provide a valuable basis for future manufacturing data analysis with ML approaches.
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 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it