ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Machine Learning-Assisted Optimisation of the Laser Beam Powder Bed Fusion (PBF-LB) Process Parameters of H13 Tool Steel Fabricated on a Preheated to 350
Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study presents the first application of Machine Learning (ML) models to optimise Powder Bed Fusion using Laser Beam (PBF-LB) process parameters for H13 steel fabricated on a 350 °C preheated building platform. A total of 189 cylindrical specimens were produced for training and testing machine learning (ML) models using variable process parameters: laser power (250-350 W), scanning speed (1050-1300 mm/s), and hatch spacing (65-90 μm). Eight ML models were investigated: 1. Support Vector Regression (SVR), 2. Kernel Ridge Regression (KRR), 3. Stochastic Gradient Descent Regressor, 4. Random Forest Regressor (RFR), 5. Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost), 6. Extreme Gradient Boosting with limited depth (XGBoost LD), 7. Extra Trees Regressor (ETR) and 8. Light Gradient Boosting Machine (LightGBM). All models were trained using the Fast Library for Automated Machine Learning & Tuning (FLAML) framework to predict the relative density of the fabricated samples. Among these, the XGBoost model achieved the highest predictive accuracy, with a coefficient of determination R2=0.977, mean absolute percentage error MAPE = 0.002, and mean absolute error MAE = 0.017. Experimental validation was conducted on 27 newly fabricated samples using ML predicted process parameters. Relative densities exceeding 99.6% of the theoretical value (7.76 g/cm
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.