MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

AI-POWERED ROBOTIC FABRICATION OF SCULPTURES USING MULTI-MATERIAL 3D PRINTING

2025· article· W7116170676 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueShodhKosh Journal of Visual and Performing Arts · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicInnovations in Concrete and Construction Materials
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProcess (computing)Automation3D printingRobotBiofabricationSculptureGenerative DesignPopulationRobotics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The current paper includes an original strategy of developing an AI-assisted robotic fabrication of sculptures using multi-material 3D printing, by combining creativity, computation, and automation in the process of modern artwork creation. The paper discusses how we can combine artificial intelligence (AI) with robotic production processes to allow autonomous design production and manipulation of materials. The system is able to increase the artistic freedom by using machine learning algorithms to design and optimize via generative design and optimization and make sure the structures and aesthetics are accurate. An extensive approach was created to combine an AI-based conceptual system with a robotic arm and multi-material print head that was adaptive. The AI model learns on data population of massive information on artistic forms and material behavior, which allows dynamic decision making when fabricating. The suggested pipeline, which includes a digital idea up to a solid sculpture, will comprise real-time sensor input and reinforcement learning to regulate adaptively the print parameters, including layer thickness, deposition speed, and combining materials. Practical work has shown that the system could create complex sculptures of both rigid and flexible materials with new textual and structural variations that could not be produced by traditional sculpture. The study emphasizes how AI-based design intelligence is used to create new forms of human-machine collaboration in the creation of art using robot precision. The findings indicate the possible great impact on the future of the computational aesthetics, digital craftsmanship, and self-fabrication systems, between the creative will and material manifestation.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.328
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.301 · 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.

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 venueShodhKosh Journal of Visual and Performing ArtsSame topicInnovations in Concrete and Construction MaterialsFrench-language works237,207