ArticleDiscover applied sciences2026
In production system for tool wear prediction using multi-sensor time series and machine learning models.
Article in Discover applied sciences, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In micro-machining milling, optimizing the process is a major key to reducing production costs. By monitoring tool wear and detecting when the quality of the machining deteriorates, the process could be more accurately adjusted. The present research explores four approaches that use different machine learning models to predict machining tool wear during the milling process. The study is based on a dataset created from a face milling operation on stainless steel round (AISI 303) material. The workpiece used for the machining process is conceived as a set of multiple stairs shape in brass and is milled using a 3 mm tungsten carbide tool. Three different types of sensors-acoustic emission, accelerometers and axis currents-are set-up to measure the wear of the tool. The article provides a description of the different sensors used, and the dataset collected. The performance of the tool wear prediction is evaluated using the F1-score and a customized weighted expected value. The extra-trees classifier yields the optimal F1-score result of 73% when evaluated across the five classes, indicating its superior performance in comparison to other classifiers. Based on this best model, the implementation feasibility and the potential performance of an in-production system predicting machining tool wear is evaluated.
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.