ArticleScientific reports2026
Modeling and prediction of 316 L stainless steel relative density in L-PBF process using machine learning.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
This study investigates the prediction of relative density in L‑PBF parts using machine learning models trained on a literature-based dataset comprising 287 experimental measurements collected from previously published studies. The input parameters for the proposed models included laser power, scanning speed, and hatch spacing. To model the nonlinear relationship between process variables and relative density, k-nearest neighbours (KNN), adaptive boosting decision trees (AdaBoost-DT), and four multilayer perceptron (MLP) models optimised using Scaled Conjugate Gradient (SCG), Levenberg-Marquardt (LM), Bayesian Regularisation (BR), and Resilient Backpropagation (RB) were developed. The predictions from these six models were subsequently integrated into a single framework using a committee machine intelligence system (CMIS), which provided improved predictive performance. Model accuracy was evaluated using statistical metrics including the coefficient of determination (R²), standard deviation (SD), average percent relative error (APRE), average absolute percent relative error (AAPRE), and root mean square error (RMSE). The results showed that the proposed hybrid modelling framework can effectively capture the complex relationship between L‑PBF process parameters and relative density. However, the heterogeneity of the literature-based dataset and the presence of a limited number of outliers may introduce uncertainty into the predictions.
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.