MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416109796 · doi:10.3390/jeta3040037

Geometric and Thermal-Induced Errors Prediction for Active Error Compensation in Machine Tools

2025· article· en· W4416109796 on OpenAlexaff
Walid Chaaibi, Abderrazak El Ouafi, Narges Omidi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Experimental and Theoretical Analyses · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Measurement and Metrology Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Rimouski
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompensation (psychology)Artificial neural networkMachine toolPosition (finance)Control theory (sociology)Field (mathematics)Model predictive controlError detection and correction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, an integrated geometric and thermal-induced errors prediction approach for active error compensation in machine tools is proposed and evaluated. The proposed approach is based on a hybrid of physical and neural network predictive modeling to drive an adaptive position controller for real-time error compensation including geometric and thermal-induced errors. Error components are formulated as a three-dimensional error field in the time-space domain. This approach involves four key steps for its development and implementation: (i) simplified experimental procedure combining a multicomponent laser interferometer measurement system and sixteen thermal sensors for error components measurement, (ii) artificial neural network-based predictive modeling of both position-dependent and position-independent error components, (iii) tridimensional volumetric error mapping using rigid body kinematics, and finally (iv) implementation of the real-time error compensation. Assessed on a turning center, the proposed approach conducts a significant improvement of the machine accuracy. The maximum error is reduced from 30 µm to less than 3 µm under thermally varying conditions.

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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.255

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Experimental and Theoretical AnalysesSame topicAdvanced Measurement and Metrology TechniquesFrench-language works237,207