Powder Bed Fusion via Machine Learning-Enabled Approaches
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Powder bed fusion (PBF) applies to various metallic materials used in the metal printing process of building a wide range of complex parts compared to other AM technologies. PBF process has several variants such as DMLS (direct metal laser sintering), EBM (electron beam melting), SHS (selective heat sintering), SLM (selective laser melting), and SLS (selective laser sintering). For PBF to reach its maximum potential, machine learning (ML) algorithms are used with suitable materials to achieve goals cost-effectively. Various applications of neural networks, including ANNs, CNNs, RNNs, and other popular techniques such as KNN, SVM, and GP were reviewed, and future challenges were discussed. Some special-purpose algorithms were listed as follows: GAN, SeDANN, SCNN, K-means, PCA, etc. This review presents the evolution, current status, challenges, and prospects of these technologies in terms of material, features, process parameters, applications, advantages, disadvantages, etc., to explain their significance and provide an in-depth understanding of the same.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".