MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6964228513 · doi:10.21776/7tvhwy60

ANALISIS FOTO MAKRO TERHADAP KEKASARAN BAJA ST 60 HASIL PEMBUBUTAN FACING DI MESIN CNC HARDINGE

2025· article· en· W6964228513 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMaterial Selection and Properties
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSurface roughnessSurface finishCnc millingMacroNumerical controlMachine toolProcess (computing)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Technological advances have made the manufacturing sector an industry that needs to develop and compete globally, one of which is CNC machines which produce quality products for industrial needs. In producing a material at CNC machine, the latest design software is needed, namely Autodesk Fusion 360. Apart from lest, on then machine processing, it is desired to produce a material surface with a good roughness value. The desired result of this research is to analyze roughness value towards facing turning results on CNC machines for variations in spindle speed, namely 410 rpm, 450 rpm, 660 rpm, 900 rpm, 1100 rpm and 1200 rpm using carbide chisels and dromus coolant. The roughness of the facing surface can be assessed using a Surface Roughness Tester and analyzing the material structure using macro photos. The results of specimen testing showed that the smallest roughness value occurred of a spindle speed of 1200 rpm with a value of Ra = 0.810 µm and the output of observations make use macro photos represent that the roughness structure of the material was very smooth compared to the production process on CNC machines using other spindle speeds.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.004

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 head0.235
GPT teacher head0.523
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicMaterial Selection and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207