ConvLSTM-Att: An Attention-Based Composite Deep Neural Network for Tool Wear Prediction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In order to improve the accuracy of tool wear prediction, an attention-based composite neural network, referred to as the ConvLSTM-Att model (1DCNN-LSTM-Attention), is proposed. Firstly, local multidimensional feature vectors are extracted with the help of a one-dimensional convolutional neural network (1D-CNN), which avoids the loss of wear features caused by manual feature extraction. Then the temporal relationship learning between multidimensional feature vectors is performed by introducing a long short-term memory (LSTM) network to make up for the lack of long-short distance dependence of the captured sequence of the CNN network. Finally, an attention mechanism is applied to strengthen the ability to extract key information from tool-wearing temporal features. The proposed ConvLSTM-Att model is trained with the measured tool wear data and then performs as a tool wear predictor. The model is compared with several state-of-the-art models on the PHM tool wear data sets. It significantly outperforms the other models in terms of prediction accuracy, but with similar computational complexity.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".