ArticleDiscover nano2024
Optimization of process parameters in 3D-nanomaterials printing for enhanced uniformity, quality, and dimensional precision using physics-guided artificial neural network.
Article in Discover nano, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Tri-domain prediction and optimization of nanocomposite polymers for high-performance 3D printing.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- A quantitative, multimodal wearable bioelectronic device for comprehensive stress assessment and sub-classification.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Development of a 3D Human Colon Model Along with Bioelectronics for the Induction and Monitoring of Diseases.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025Article
- Additive Manufacturing of Bead-Chain-Shaped Scaffolds with AI-Based Process Optimization.Polymers · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pneumatic 3D-nanomaterial printing, a prominent additive manufacturing technique, excels in processing advanced materials like MXene, crucial for applications in nano-energy, flexible electronics, and sensors. A key challenge in this domain is optimizing process parameters-applied pressure, ink concentration, nozzle diameter, and printing velocity-to achieve uniform, high-quality prints with the desired filament diameter. Traditional trial-and-error methods often result in significant material waste and time consumption. To address this, our study introduces a comprehensive pipeline that initially assesses whether the selected process parameters yield uniform, high-quality MXene prints. Subsequently, it employs a Physics-Guided Artificial Neural Network (PGANN) to predict the filament diameter based on these parameters, integrating fundamental physical principles of the printing process with experimental data. Our findings demonstrate that using an XGBoost classifier, we can classify printed filament quality with an accuracy of 90.44%. Furthermore, the PGANN model shows exceptional performance in predicting the filament diameter, achieving a Pearson Correlation Coefficient (PCC) of 0.9488, a Mean Squared Error (MSE) of 0.000092 mm
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.