ArticleScientific reports2024
Machine learning enables electrical resistivity modeling of printed lines in aerosol jet 3D printing.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- CFD-enabled sustainable design and manufacturing of cooling fan for unmanned helicopter.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Bridging Additive Manufacturing and Electronics Printing in the Age of AI.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Use of Computational Intelligence in Customizing Drug Release from 3D-Printed Products: A Comprehensive Review.Pharmaceutics · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Among various non-contact direct ink writing techniques, aerosol jet printing (AJP) stands out due to its distinct advantages, including a more adaptable working distance (2-5 mm) and higher resolution (~ 10 μm). These characteristics make AJP a promising technology for the precise customization of intricate electrical functional devices. However, complex interactions among the machine, process, and materials result in low controllability over the electrical performance of printed lines. This significantly affects the functionality of printed components, thereby limiting the broad applications of AJP. Therefore, a systematic machine learning approach that integrates experimental design, geometrical features extraction, and non-parametric modeling is proposed to achieve printing quality optimization and electrical resistivity prediction for the printed lines in AJP. Specifically, three classical convolutional neural networks (CNNs) architectures are compared for extracting representative features of printed lines, and an optimal operating window is identified to effectively discriminate better line morphology from inferior printed line patterns within the design space. Subsequently, three representative non-parametric machine learning techniques are employed for resistivity modeling. Following that, the modeling performances of the adopted machine learning methods were systematically compared based on four conventional evaluation metrics. Together, these aspects contribute to optimizing the printed line morphology, while simultaneously identifying the optimal resistivity model for accurate predictions in AJP.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.