MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410879833 · doi:10.1016/j.finel.2025.104356

Optimization of point-melting strategies for the Electron Beam Melting process

2025· article· en· W4410879833 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueFinite Elements in Analysis and Design · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdditive Manufacturing Materials and Processes
Canadian institutionsEngineering Link (Canada)
FundersConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo
KeywordsFinite element methodMelting pointProcess (computing)Cathode rayPoint (geometry)Beam (structure)Materials scienceMechanical engineeringComputer scienceElectronStructural engineeringPhysicsEngineeringMathematicsComposite materialGeometryNuclear physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study proposes an optimization methodology to find optimal heat source paths for point-melting in Electron Beam Melting (EBM) Powder Bed Fusion (PBF) processes, aiming to reduce the need for support structures and improve print quality. The building process is simulated using a time-dependent, one-way coupled, non-linear thermo-mechanical model, assuming negligible molten flow, with elastoplastic behavior and temperature-dependent material parameters. The goal of the optimization problem is to find heat source paths that minimize a global temperature measure with a penalty on excessive local temperatures. The numerical methodology is based on solving the non-linear partial differential equations via the Finite Element Method (FEM) and is applied in numerical examples for printing with titanium alloy Ti6Al4V. Metrics related to heat, residual displacement, and residual stresses are considered to assess the performance of different point-melting strategies and to compare optimized and conventional paths. The feasibility of the proposed optimization methodology for practical applications and alternatives towards future methodological advancements are discussed. The study provides a Python-based, MPI-parallelized implementation using open-source libraries and is made available for further research and 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.

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 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 score0.959
Threshold uncertainty score0.298

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.252 · 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