MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408350013 · doi:10.1016/j.addma.2025.104736

Accurate inverse process optimization framework in laser directed energy deposition

2025· article· en· W4408350013 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueAdditive manufacturing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdditive Manufacturing Materials and Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsMaterials scienceInverseDeposition (geology)Process (computing)Energy (signal processing)Process optimizationLaserInverse methodProcess engineeringChemical engineeringOpticsComputer scienceApplied mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In additive manufacturing (AM), particularly in laser-based metal AM, process optimization is crucial to the quality of products and the efficiency of production. The identification of optimal process parameters out of a vast parameter space, however, is a daunting task. Despite advances in simulations, the process optimization for specific materials and geometries is developed through a sequential and time-consuming trial-and-error approach and often lacks the versatility to address multiple optimization objectives. Machine learning (ML) provides a powerful tool to accelerate the optimization process, but most current studies focus on simple single-track prints, which hardly translate to manufacturing 3D bulk components for engineering applications. In this study, we develop an A ccurate I nverse process optimization framework in laser D irected E nergy D eposition (AIDED), based on machine learning models and a genetic algorithm, to aid the process optimization in laser DED. Using AIDED, we demonstrate the following: (i) Accurate prediction of the area of single-track melt pool ( R 2 score 0.995), the tilt angle of multi-track melt pool ( R 2 score 0.969), and the cross-sectional geometries of multi-layer melt pool (1.75% and 12.04% errors in width and height, respectively) directly from process parameters; (ii) Determination of appropriate hatch spacing and layer thickness for fabricating fully dense (density > 99.9%) multi-track and multi-layer prints; (iii) Inverse identification of optimal process parameters directly from customizable application objectives within 1-3 hours. We also validate the effectiveness of the AIDED experimentally by solving a multi-objective optimization problem to identify the optimal process parameters for achieving high print speeds with small effective track widths. Furthermore, we show the transferability of the framework from stainless steel to pure nickel using a small amount of additional data on pure nickel. With such transferability in AIDED, we pave a new way for “aiding” the process optimization of the laser-based AM processes that is applicable to a wide range of materials. • Inversely identifies optimal process parameters from customizable objectives. • Accurately predicts melt pool geometries directly from process parameters. • Finds optimal hatch spacing and layer thickness to make fully dense prints. • Transferable to new materials systems and optimization objectives with a small amount of extra data.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.948
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.217 · 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