MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406564036 · doi:10.1016/j.jcomc.2025.100560

Safe optimization with grey-box information: Application to composites autoclave processing improvement on the fly

2025· article· en· W4406564036 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad Roohi, Milad Ramezankhani, Maryam Kamgarpour, Abbas S. Milani

Bibliographic record

VenueComposites Part C Open Access · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicManufacturing Process and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutoclaveComposite materialMaterials scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the manufacture of aerospace-grade composites in the autoclave, the curing process plays a crucial role as it directly governs the quality of the final parts. Maintaining the part’s thermal history, namely, thermal lag and exotherm, under predetermined thresholds as well as achieving a uniform degree of cure throughout the material thickness can result in the desired product quality. Currently, for many such manufacturing applications, the optimization of the curing process (often conducted via trial-and-error) is highly expensive and time-consuming and occasionally leads to failed products. In order to address this problem, in this paper, a Safe Optimization approach is proposed. The suggested framework allows for the on-the-fly optimization of curing process configurations while avoiding interruptions typically encountered during trials. In other words, the proposed algorithm is capable of consistently yielding “pass” products as it navigates toward the optimal configuration. In particular, we introduce a hybrid optimization framework that combines a genetic algorithm, namely NSGA-II, using inexpressive stimulation (white-box) data for finding a safe initial starting point and then, the (black-box) safe logarithmic barrier method for enhancing the product quality presumably using experimental data on-the-fly. Herein, however, as proof of concept, we employ synthetic data throughout the framework in a case study.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.266 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComposites Part C Open AccessSame topicManufacturing Process and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207