Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38611971›Full record

ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2024

Evaluation of High-Frequency Measurement Errors from Turned Surface Topography Data Using Machine Learning Methods.

Przemysław Podulka, Monika Kulisz, Katarzyna Antosz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Przemysław PodulkaFaculty of Mechanical Engineering and Aeronautics, Rzeszow University of Technology, 35-959 Rzeszow, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-1699-3137
Monika KuliszFaculty of Management, Lublin University of Technology, 20-618 Lublin, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-8111-2316
Katarzyna AntoszFaculty of Mechanical Engineering and Aeronautics, Rzeszow University of Technology, 35-959 Rzeszow, Poland.ORCID 0000-0001-6048-5220

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Manufacturing processes in industry applications are often controlled by the evaluation of surface topography. Topography, in its overall performance, includes form, waviness, and roughness. Methods of measurement of surface roughness can be roughly divided into tactile and contactless techniques. The latter ones are much faster but sensitive to external disturbances from the environment. One type of external source error, while the measurement of surface topography occurs, is a high-frequency noise. This noise originates from the vibration of the measuring system. In this study, the methods for reducing high-frequency errors from the results of contactless roughness measurements of turned surfaces were supported by machine learning methods. This research delves into optimizing filtration methods for surface topography measurements through the application of machine learning models, focusing on enhancing the accuracy of surface roughness assessments. By examining turned surfaces under specific machining conditions and employing a variety of digital filters, the study identifies the Gaussian regression filter and spline filter as the most effective methods at a 22.5 µm cut-off. Utilizing neural networks, support vector machines, and decision trees, the research demonstrates the superior performance of SVMs, achieving remarkable accuracy and sensitivity in predicting optimal filtration methods.

Indexed as

artificial neural networkdecision treeshigh-frequency errorsmachiningmeasurement noiseroughnesssurface topographySVMturning

Identifiers

PMID38611971
PMCPMC11012604

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.