MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402348253 · doi:10.1080/17452759.2024.2399186

Virtual rapid prototyping of materials with deep learning: spatiotemporal stress fields prediction in ceramics employing convolutional neural networks and transfer learning

2024· article· en· W4402348253 on OpenAlexafffund
Mohammad Rezasefat, James D. Hogan

Bibliographic record

VenueVirtual and Physical Prototyping · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMachine Learning in Materials Science
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTransfer of learningConvolutional neural networkDeep learningRapid prototypingStress (linguistics)Artificial intelligenceArtificial neural networkComputer scienceCeramicMaterials scienceEngineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Additive manufacturing offers a solution for producing advanced ceramics with complex geometries by enabling precise control over geometry, microstructure, and composition. By leveraging deep learning, rapid prototyping and evaluation of printed ceramic parts become feasible. This study employs convolutional neural networks and transfer learning to predict spatiotemporal fields in ceramics, using synthetic datasets generated from X-ray computed tomography (micro-CT) and finite element analysis. The novel approach integrates spatiotemporal factors into deep learning models, enhancing the prediction of stress and damage evolution, and ultimately providing deeper insights into material behaviour and performance. Additionally, we introduce a target loss training strategy, which focuses on achieving a specific accuracy level, thus reducing training time while maintaining high precision. The proposed deep learning framework achieves accurate predictions of spatiotemporal stress fields, and captures fracture initiation and propagation behaviours. This method facilitates rapid prototyping and advances material design and evaluation processes while significantly reducing experimental efforts.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 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

Citations9
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVirtual and Physical PrototypingSame topicMachine Learning in Materials ScienceFrench-language works237,207