Designing UV-Curable Resin-Made Polymeric Foams with Lattice Structures for Desired Stiffness via Machine Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Several industries extensively utilize polymeric foams due to their exceptional characteristics. The mechanical properties of a foam structure play a significant role in compression, so it is necessary to optimize foam deformation to achieve the desired outcome. The cell structures of foams are created randomly, but the issue has been resolved by lattice structures. Compared with traditional foams, lattice structures can enhance mechanical properties and facilitate the development of novel applications. Despite extensive research on lattice structures in both rigid and soft materials, there is a notable lack of predictive modeling specifically for soft thermoset Ultraviolet (UV)-curable lattice structures. This study employs additive manufacturing (AM) and machine learning (ML) to address this discrepancy. In this work, 93 lattice designs were produced using AM and evaluated for their geometric structure through compression tests utilizing ML techniques, specifically artificial neural network (ANN) and random forest (RF). The process involves the preparation of data, training of ML models, and evaluation. The RF model surpasses ANN model and is the most effective at predicting lattice geometries using force, strain, and lattice-type inputs in a graphical user interface. Hence, this study improves ML comprehension and utilization in the design of lattice structures to optimize the performance of soft materials across diverse applications.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".