Review of Transfer Learning in Additive Manufacturing Modeling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The process-structure-property modeling of additive manufacturing (AM) products plays an important role in process and quality control. In practice however, only limited data are available for each product due to its expensive material and time-consuming fabricating process, which becomes an obstacle to achieve high quality models. Transfer learning (TL) is a new and promising approach that the model of one product (source) may be reused for another product (target) with limited new data on the target. This paper focuses on reviewing applications of TL in AM modeling in order to help further research in this area. To clarify the specific topic, the problem definition is presented, as well as the differences between TL, multi-fidelity modeling, and multi-task learning. Then current applications of TL in AM modeling are summarized according to different TL approaches. To better understand the performances of different TL approaches, several representative TL-assisted AM modeling methods are reproduced and tested on an open-source dataset. Based on the test results, their effectiveness and limitations are discussed in detail. Finally, future research directions about TL in AM modeling are discussed in hope to explore more potential of TL in boosting the AM model performance.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".