ArticlePolymers2026
Deep Learning for Process Monitoring and Defect Detection of Laser-Based Powder Bed Fusion of Polymers.
Article in Polymers, 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
Maintaining consistent part quality remains a critical challenge in industrial additive manufacturing, particularly in laser-based powder bed fusion of polymers (PBF-LB/P), where crystallization-driven thermal instabilities, governed by isothermal crystallization within a narrow sintering window, precipitate defects such as curling, warping, and delamination. In contrast to metal-based systems dominated by melt-pool hydrodynamics, polymer PBF-LB/P requires monitoring strategies capable of resolving subtle spatio-temporal thermal deviations under realistic industrial operating conditions. Although machine learning, particularly convolutional neural networks (CNNs), has demonstrated efficacy in defect detection, a structured evaluation of heterogeneous modeling paradigms and their deployment feasibility in polymer PBF-LB/P remains limited. This study presents a systematic cross-paradigm assessment of unsupervised anomaly detection (autoencoders and generative adversarial networks), supervised CNN classifiers (VGG-16, ResNet50, and Xception), hybrid CNN-LSTM architectures, and physics-informed neural networks (PINNs) using 76,450 synchronized thermal and RGB images acquired from a commercial industrial system operating under closed control constraints. CNN-based models enable frame- and sequence-level defect classification, whereas the PINN component complements detection by providing physically consistent thermal-field regression. The results reveal quantifiable trade-offs between detection performance, temporal robustness, physical consistency, and algorithmic complexity. Pre-trained CNNs achieve up to 99.09% frame-level accuracy but impose a substantial computational burden for edge deployment. The PINN model attains an RMSE of approximately 27 K under quasi-isothermal process conditions, supporting trend-level thermal monitoring. A lightweight hybrid CNN achieves 99.7% validation accuracy with 1860 parameters and a CPU-benchmarked forward-pass inference time of 1.6 ms (excluding sensor acquisition latency). Collectively, this study establishes a rigorously benchmarked, scalable, and resource-efficient deep-learning framework tailored to crystallization-dominated polymer PBF-LB/P, providing a technically grounded basis for real-time industrial quality monitoring.
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.