ReviewMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Research Progress in Multidimensional Prediction of Machining-Induced Surface Residual Stress.
Review 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Intense thermo-mechanical coupling effects during cutting generate residual stress within the surface layer of a workpiece. This residual stress is a critical factor influencing the fatigue life, corrosion resistance, and dimensional stability of mechanical components, making its accurate prediction and control essential for improving product performance. To address the often generalized treatment of residual stress prediction modeling in existing literature, this paper presents a systematic review of recent advances in surface residual stress prediction for cutting operations. It details the formation mechanisms and significance of residual stress, focusing on four primary modeling approaches: empirical models based on experimental data, analytical models founded on metal cutting and elastoplastic theory, finite element models that simulate actual machining conditions, and hybrid models. A comprehensive analysis and comparison of these four model types is provided, summarizing their respective advantages and limitations. Furthermore, this paper identifies potential future research directions and development trends in residual stress prediction modeling, serving as a valuable reference for work in this field.
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.