Machine Learning for Identifying Damage and Predicting Properties in 3D-Printed PLA/Lygeum Spartum Biocomposites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper offers an experimental approach that integrates acoustic emission (AE) monitoring with machine learning (ML) to identify damage mechanisms and predict the mechanical properties of 3D-printed biocomposites. Specimens were fabricated using a bio-filament composed of a PLA matrix reinforced with 10% wt. of Lygeum spartum fibers and were subjected to tensile and flexural tests. The processed dataset, comprising six normalized features (cumulative rise, duration, count, frequency, energy, and amplitude) was used to train four ML models: Random Forest Regression (RFR), Support Vector Regression (SVR), Artificial Neural Networks (ANN), and Decision Trees (DT) implemented in Python using libraries such as scikit-learn, pandas, and numpy. The prediction models were developed using an 80/20 train–test split and further validated by 5-fold cross-validation, with performance evaluated by R-squared (R2) and Mean Squared Error (MSE) metrics. Our results demonstrate robust prediction capabilities, with the RFR model achieving the highest accuracy (R2 > 0.98 and MSE as low as 0.013 for tensile stress prediction). Additionally, unsupervised clustering using K-means was applied to group AE signals into distinct clusters corresponding to different damage modes. This comprehensive methodology not only enhances our understanding of damage evolution in composite materials but also establishes a data-driven framework for non-destructive evaluation and structural health monitoring.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".