The DOI matches its Crossref record.
A Review of Machine Learning Applications in Additive Manufacturing
Abstract
Variability in product quality continues to pose a major barrier to the widespread application of additive manufacturing (AM) processes in production environment. Towards addressing this barrier, monitoring AM processes and measuring AM materials and parts has become increasingly commonplace, and increasingly precise, making a new wave of AM-related data available. This newfound data provides a valuable resource for gaining new insight to AM processes and decision making. Machine Learning (ML) provides an avenue to gain this insight by 1) learning fundamental knowledge about AM processes and 2) identifying predictive and actionable recommendations to optimize part quality and process design. This report presents a literature review of ML applications in AM. The review identifies areas in the AM lifecycle, including design, process plan, build, post process, and test and validation, that have been researched using ML. Furthermore, this report discusses the benefits of ML for AM, as well as existing hurdles currently limiting applications.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The integration of machine learning in manufacturing has been well-established in recent years, aiming to enhance efficiency and precision in the manufacturing process.
“The integration of machine learning in manufacturing has been well-established in recent years, aiming to enhance efficiency and precision in the manufacturing process [415-419].”
From A comprehensive review of lunar-based manufacturing and construction (2024) · cites this paper as [417]
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Ukwaththa, J., Herath, S., & Meddage, D. P. P. (2024) · Materials Today Communications · doi:10.1016/j.mtcomm.2024.110294 · Cited by 118
A comprehensive review of lunar-based manufacturing and construction
Azami, M., Kazemi, Z., Moazen, S., Dubé, M., Potvin, M.-J., & Skonieczny, K. (2024) · Progress in Aerospace Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.paerosci.2024.101045 · Cited by 57
Metadata
- Authors
- Razvi, S. S., Feng, S., Narayanan, A., Lee, Y.-T. T., & Witherell, P.
- Affiliations
- National Institute of Standards and Technology (US)
- University of Southern California (US)
- Venue
- Volume 1: 39th Computers and Information in Engineering Conference
- Published
- 2019-08-18
- OpenAlex
- W2972263106
- Cited by
- 189
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 12 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 29 · 2023: 39 · 2022: 35 · 2021: 38 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 2
- FWCI
- 20.76
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- ASME International Computers in Engineering Conference and Engineering Database Symposium (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering › Additive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanical Engineering › Additive Manufacturing Materials and Processes
- Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Materials Chemistry › Machine Learning in Materials Science
- Keywords
- additive manufacturing, machine learning applications, process monitoring, part quality prediction, process optimization, process planning, post-processing, material characterization, data-driven decision making
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review