A decision support system for the selection of FDM process parameters using MOORA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Additive Manufacturing (AM) is an automated process of fabricating three-dimensional (3D) physical objects from a 3D-CAD data by adding layers of materials one upon another through a print head or nozzle without using any tooling components or machining environments. Due to freedom in design, any complex shape can be produced using this process. Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM) is one such AM technology that is commonly used for its simplicity, environment friendliness and low requirement for process monitoring. However, this technology is limited only to small-scale production due to high cost and high build time. The present work focuses on the development of a framework for parametric optimization of the FDM process using multi-objective optimization based on ratio analysis (MOORA). A CAD model of the cam follower mechanism has been prepared in the Solidworks platform and used in this experiment for optimization of build time and cost which have been considered as response variables of the experiment. The experiment has been conducted following the full factorial design of experiment (DoE) method.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 0.005 |
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".