MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394577314 · doi:10.3390/s24072324

Cyber–Physical Systems for High-Performance Machining of Difficult to Cut Materials in I5.0 Era—A Review

2024· article· en· W4394577314 on OpenAlexafffund
Hossein Gohari, Mahmoud Hassan, Bin Shi, A. Sadek, Helmi Attia, Rachid M’Saoubi

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced machining processes and optimization
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityNational Research Council Canada
FundersNational Research Council CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacsMcGill University
KeywordsCyber-physical systemMachiningProcess (computing)Computer scienceEngineeringRisk analysis (engineering)Manufacturing engineeringReliability engineeringSystems engineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The fifth Industrial revolution (I5.0) prioritizes resilience and sustainability, integrating cognitive cyber-physical systems and advanced technologies to enhance machining processes. Numerous research studies have been conducted to optimize machining operations by identifying and reducing sources of uncertainty and estimating the optimal cutting parameters. Virtual modeling and Tool Condition Monitoring (TCM) methodologies have been developed to assess the cutting states during machining processes. With a precise estimation of cutting states, the safety margin necessary to deal with uncertainties can be reduced, resulting in improved process productivity. This paper reviews the recent advances in high-performance machining systems, with a focus on cyber-physical models developed for the cutting operation of difficult-to-cut materials using cemented carbide tools. An overview of the literature and background on the advances in offline and online process optimization approaches are presented. Process optimization objectives such as tool life utilization, dynamic stability, enhanced productivity, improved machined part quality, reduced energy consumption, and carbon emissions are independently investigated for these offline and online optimization methods. Addressing the critical objectives and constraints prevalent in industrial applications, this paper explores the challenges and opportunities inherent to developing a robust cyber-physical optimization system.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.410

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicAdvanced machining processes and optimizationFrench-language works237,207