MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4317213365 · doi:10.1007/s11831-022-09836-2

A Review of Image-Based Simulation Applications in High-Value Manufacturing

2023· review· en· W4317213365 on OpenAlexaff
Llion Marc Evans, Emrah Sözümert, Bethany E. Keenan, C. Wood, Anton du Plessis

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Computational Methods in Engineering · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicManufacturing Process and Optimization
Canadian institutionsObject Research Systems (Canada)
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
KeywordsImage (mathematics)Value (mathematics)Computer scienceComputer visionMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Image-Based Simulation (IBSim) is the process by which a digital representation of a real geometry is generated from image data for the purpose of performing a simulation with greater accuracy than with idealised Computer Aided Design (CAD) based simulations. Whilst IBSim originates in the biomedical field, the wider adoption of imaging for non-destructive testing and evaluation (NDT/NDE) within the High-Value Manufacturing (HVM) sector has allowed wider use of IBSim in recent years. IBSim is invaluable in scenarios where there exists a non-negligible variation between the 'as designed' and 'as manufactured' state of parts. It has also been used for characterisation of geometries too complex to accurately draw with CAD. IBSim simulations are unique to the geometry being imaged, therefore it is possible to perform part-specific virtual testing within batches of manufactured parts. This novel review presents the applications of IBSim within HVM, whereby HVM is the value provided by a manufactured part (or conversely the potential cost should the part fail) rather than the actual cost of manufacturing the part itself. Examples include fibre and aggregate composite materials, additive manufacturing, foams, and interface bonding such as welding. This review is divided into the following sections: Material Characterisation; Characterisation of Manufacturing Techniques; Impact of Deviations from Idealised Design Geometry on Product Design and Performance; Customisation and Personalisation of Products; IBSim in Biomimicry. Finally, conclusions are drawn, and observations made on future trends based on the current state of the literature.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.004

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.340 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations39
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchives of Computational Methods in EngineeringSame topicManufacturing Process and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207