Skip to main content
Log in

Classification-driven model selection approach of genetic programming in modelling of turning process

  • ORIGINAL ARTICLE
  • Published:
The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Turning is a widely used machining process, but the process complexity and uncertainty lead to empirical modelling techniques being preferred over physics-based models for predicting the process performance. The literature reveals that empirical methods such as artificial neural networks (ANN), support vector regression (SVR), regression analysis and fuzzy logic have been extensively applied in the modelling of turning process. The present work introduces genetic programming (GP) for the modelling of turning, but it is observed that the optimal models selected from the GP population based on training and validation errors do not perform well on testing data (unseen samples). Selecting the best GP model from the population of models is therefore a vital step. In view of this, the classification-driven model selection approach of GP (C-GP) is proposed in this paper. In this methodology, potential classification techniques such as Bayes multinomial, partitioning and regression trees, classification and regression trees and decision trees are integrated with GP to predict the class (best or bad) of the GP models. The model that is classified as the “best” by the most number of classification techniques is selected, and its performance is compared to those from ANN and SVR. It is found that the C-GP model has accuracy on par with ANN and gives satisfactory performance on testing data.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Yildiz AR (2012) A comparative study of population-based optimization algorithms for turning operations. Inform Sci 210:81–88

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. Yildiz AR (2013) A new hybrid differential evolution algorithm for the selection of optimal machining parameters in milling operations. Appl Soft Comput 13(3):1561–1566

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Yildiz AR (2013) A new hybrid artificial bee colony algorithm for robust optimal design and manufacturing. Appl Soft Comput 13(5):2906–2912

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Yildiz AR (2013) Optimization of cutting parameters in multi-pass turning using artificial bee colony-based approach. Inform Sci 220:399–407

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  5. Yildiz AR (2013) Hybrid Taguchi-differential evolution algorithm for optimization of multi-pass turning operations. Appl Soft Comput 13(3):1433–1439

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Yildiz AR (2013) Cuckoo search algorithm for the selection of optimal machining parameters in milling operations. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 64(1–4):55–61

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Yıldız AR (2009) A novel hybrid immune algorithm for global optimization in design and manufacturing. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 25(2):261–270

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Yıldız AR (2009) An effective hybrid immune-hill climbing optimization approach for solving design and manufacturing optimization problems in industry. J Mat Processing Technol 209(6):2773–2780

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Chandrasekaran M, Muralidhar M, Krishna CM, Dixit U (2010) Application of soft computing techniques in machining performance prediction and optimization: a literature review. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 46:445–464

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Chu X, Tang C, Xue D, Su Y, Sun X (2012) Identification of machining features based on available resources of cutting tools. Int J Prod Res 50:4141–4157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Ic YT, Yurdakul M, Eraslan E (2012) Development of a component-based machining centre selection model using AHP. Int J Prod Res 50:6489–6498

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Sun X, Chu X, Xue D, Su Y, Tang C (2012) An integrated setup/fixture planning approach for machining prismatic parts. Int J Prod Res 50:1009–1027

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Garg A, Bhalerao Y, Tai K (in press) Review of empirical modeling techniques for modeling of turning process. Int J Model Ident Control

  14. Rangwala SS, Dornfeld DA (1989) Learning and optimization of machining operations using computing abilities of neural networks. Systems, Man and Cybernetics, IEEE Transactions on 19:299–314

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Azouzi R, Guillot M (1997) On-line prediction of surface finish and dimensional deviation in turning using neural network based sensor fusion. Int J Mach Tool Manuf 37:1201–1217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Kohli A, Dixit US (2005) A neural-network-based methodology for the prediction of surface roughness in a turning process. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 25:118–129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Pal SK, Chakraborty D (2005) Surface roughness prediction in turning using artificial neural network. Neural Computing & Applications 14:319–324

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Hadi Y, Ahmed SG (2006) Assessment of surface roughness model for turning process. Knowledge Enterprise: Intelligent Strategies in Product Design, Manufacturing and Management 207:152–158

    Google Scholar 

  19. Yaldiz S, Unsacar F, Saglam H (2006) Comparison of experimental results obtained by designed dynamometer to fuzzy model for predicting cutting forces in turning. Mater Des 27:1139–1147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Kirby ED, Chen JC (2007) Development of a fuzzy-nets-based surface roughness prediction system in turning operations. Comput Ind Eng 53:30–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Salgado DR, Alonso FJ (2007) An approach based on current and sound signals for in-process tool wear monitoring. Int J Mach Tool Manuf 47:2140–2152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Davim JP, Gaitonde VN, Karnik SR (2008) Investigations into the effect of cutting conditions on surface roughness in turning of free machining steel by ANN models. J Mater Process Technol 205:16–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Kaewkuekool S, Jirapattarasilp K, Pechkong K (2009). A study of influence factors affecting to surface roughness in stainless steel turning. Proceedings of International Conference on Computer Engineering and Technology (ICCET), pp 299–302

  24. Nalbant M, Gokkaya H, Toktas I, Sur G (2009) The experimental investigation of the effects of uncoated, PVD- and CVD-coated cemented carbide inserts and cutting parameters on surface roughness in CNC turning and its prediction using artificial neural networks. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 25:211–223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Thakur DG, Ramamoorthy B, Vijayaraghavan L (2009) An experimental analysis of effective high speed turning of superalloy Inconel 718. J Mater Sci 44:3296–3304

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Ozkan, I. A., Saritas, I. & Yaldiz, S. (2010). A comparative study of ANN and FES for predicting of cutting forces and tool tip temperature in turning. Proceedings for 11th International Conference on Computer Systems and Technologies and workshop for Ph.D Students in Computing. pp. 177–185.

  27. Rajasekaran T, Vinayagam BK, Palanikumar K, Prakash S (2010) Influence of machining parameters on surface roughness and material removal rate in machining carbon fiber reinforced polymer material. Frontiers in Automobile and, Mechanical Engineering (FAME), pp 75–80

    Google Scholar 

  28. Qian, Y., Tian, J., Liu, L., Zhang, Y. & Chen, Y. (2010). A tool wear predictive model based on SVM. Control and Decision Conference (CCDC). pp. 1213–1217.

  29. Aouici H, Yallese MA, Fnides B, Chaoui K, Mabrouki T (2011) Modeling and optimization of hard turning of X38CrMoV5-1 steel with CBN tool: Machining parameters effects on flank wear and surface roughness. J Mech Sci Technol 25:2843–2851

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Chavoshi SZ (2011) Tool flank wear prediction in CNC turning of 7075 AL alloy SiC composite. Prod Eng 5:37–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Lan TS (2011) Fuzzy parametric deduction for material removal rate optimization. J Math Stat 7:51–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Rajasekaran T, Palanikumar K, Vinayagam BK (2011) Application of fuzzy logic for modeling surface roughness in turning CFRP composites using CBN tool. Prod Eng 5:191–199

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Zain AM, Haron H, Sharif S (2012) Integrated ANN-GA for estimating the minimum value for machining performance. Int J Prod Res 50:191–213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Judd, C. M., Mcclelland, G. H. & Ryan, C. S. (2009). Data analysis: a model comparison approach. Routledge/Taylor & Francis, New York

  35. Ezugwu EO, Arthur SJ, Hines EL (1995) Tool-wear prediction using artificial neural networks. J Mater Process Technol 49:255–264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Dutta RK, Paul S, Chattopadhyay AB (2000) Applicability of the modified back-propagation algorithm in tool condition monitoring for faster convergence. J Mater Process Technol 98:299–309

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Tosun N, Özler L (2002) A study of tool life in hot machining using artificial neural networks and regression analysis method. J Mater Process Technol 124:99–104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Feng C-X, Wang X-F (2003) Surface roughness predictive modeling: neural networks versus regression. IIE Trans 35:11–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Risbood K, Dixit U, Sahasrabudhe A (2003) Prediction of surface roughness and dimensional deviation by measuring cutting forces and vibrations in turning process. J Mater Process Technol 132:203–214

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Jiao Y, Lei S, Pei Z, Lee E (2004) Fuzzy adaptive networks in machining process modeling: surface roughness prediction for turning operations. Int J Mach Tool Manuf 44:1643–1651

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Nandi AK, Pratihar DK (2004) An expert system based on FBFN using a GA to predict surface finish in ultra-precision turning. J Mater Process Technol 155–156:1150–1156

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Özel T, Karpat Y (2005) Predictive modeling of surface roughness and tool wear in hard turning using regression and neural networks. Int J Mach Tool Manuf 45:467–479

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Hao W, Zhu X, Li X, Turyagyenda G (2006) Prediction of cutting force for self-propelled rotary tool using artificial neural networks. J Mater Process Technol 180:23–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Al-Ahmari A (2007) Predictive machinability models for a selected hard material in turning operations. J Mater Process Technol 190:305–311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Basak S, Dixit U, Davim J (2007) Application of radial basis function neural networks in optimization of hard turning of AISI D2 cold-worked tool steel with a ceramic tool. Proc Inst Mechanical Eng Part B: J Eng Manufact 221:987–998

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Erzurumulu T, Oktem H (2007) Comparison of response surface model with neural network in determining the surface quality of moulded parts. Mater Des 28:459–465

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Sarma D, Dixit U (2007) A comparison of dry and air-cooled turning of grey cast iron with mixed oxide ceramic tool. J Mater Process Technol 190:160–172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Fang X, Jawahir I (1994) Predicting total machining performance in finish turning using integrated fuzzy-set models of the machinability parameters. Int J Prod Res 32:833–849

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  49. Nandi A, Pratihar D (2004) An expert system based on FBFN using a GA to predict surface finish in ultra-precision turning. J Mater Process Technol 155:1150–1156

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Abburi N, Dixit U (2006) A knowledge-based system for the prediction of surface roughness in turning process. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 22:363–372

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Gajate A, Haber R, Deltoro R, Vega P, Bustillo A (2010) Tool wear monitoring using neuro-fuzzy techniques: a comparative study in a turning process. J Intell Manuf 23:869–882

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Massol O, Li X, Gouriveau R, Zhou JH, Gan OP (2010). An exTS based neuro-fuzzy algorithm for prognostics and tool condition monitoring. International Conference on Control Automation Robotics and Vision, pp 1329–1334

  53. Gill SS, Singh R, Singh J, Singh H (2012) Adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system modeling of cryogenically treated AISI M2 HSS turning tool for estimation of flank wear. Expert Syst Appl 39:4171–4180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Kothamasu R, Huang SH, Verduin WH (2005) Comparison of computational intelligence and statistical methods in condition monitoring for hard turning. Int J Prod Res 43:597–610

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  55. Özel T, Karpat Y, Figueira L, Davim JP (2007) Modelling of surface finish and tool flank wear in turning of AISI D2 steel with ceramic wiper inserts. J Mater Process Technol 189:192–198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Mata F, Beamud E, Hanafi I, Khamlichi A, Jabbouri A, Bezzazi M (2010) Multiple regression prediction model for cutting forces in turning carbon-reinforced PEEK CF30. Adv Mater Sci Eng 2010:1–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Prakash U, Yogavardhanaswamy GN, Ajit Prasad SL, Ravindra HV, Rajan TDP (2011) Tool wear prediction by regression analysis in turning A356 with 10% SiC. International Proceedings of Recent Advances in Intelligent Computational Systems (RAICS), pp 682–687

  58. Zhang JY, Liang SY, Zhang G, Yen D (2006) Modeling of residual stress profile in finish hard turning. Mater Manuf Process 21:39–45

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  59. Gupta AK (2008) Predictive modelling of turning operations using response surface methodology, artificial neural networks and support vector regression. Int J Prod Res 48:763–778

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Salgado DR, Alonso FJ, Cambero I, Marcelo A (2009) In-process surface roughness prediction system using cutting vibrations in turning. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 43:40–51

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Çaydas U, Ekici S (2010) Support vector machines models for surface roughness prediction in CNC turning of AISI 304 austenitic stainless steel. J Intell Manuf 23:639–650

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Chryssolouris G, Lee M, Ramsey A (1996) Confidence interval prediction for neural network models. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks 7:229–232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Shao R, Martin E, Zhang J, Morris A (1997) Confidence bounds for neural network representations. Comput Chem Eng 21:S1173–S1178

    Google Scholar 

  64. Hinchliffe M, Hiden H, Mckay B, Willis M, Tham M, Barton G (1996). Modelling chemical process systems using a multi-gene genetic programming algorithm. Late breaking paper, GP’96, Stanford, USA, pp 28–31

  65. Kovacic M, Brezocnik M (2003) Genetic programming approach for surface quality prediction. Tehnicki Vjesnik 10:19–24

    Google Scholar 

  66. Kovacic M, Balic J, Brezocnik M (2004) Evolutionary approach for cutting forces prediction in milling. J Mater Process Technol 155:1647–1652

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Baziar MH, Jafarian Y, Shahnazari H, Movahed V, Amin Tutunchian M (2011) Prediction of strain energy-based liquefaction resistance of sand–silt mixtures: an evolutionary approach. Comput Geosci 37:1883–1893

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Garg A, Tai K (2011) A hybrid genetic programming—artificial neural network approach for modeling of vibratory finishing process. Int Proc Comput Sci Inform Technol (IPCSIT) 18:14–19

    Google Scholar 

  69. Garg A, Tai K (2012). Comparison of regression analysis, artificial neural network and genetic programming in Handling the multicollinearity problem. 2012 Proceedings of International Conference on Modelling, Identification and Control (ICMIC), Wuhan, China, IEEE, pp 353–358

  70. Garg A, Tai K (2012) Review of genetic programming in modeling of machining processes. 2012 Proceedings of International Conference on Modelling, Identification and Control (ICMIC), Wuhan, China, IEEE, pp 653–658

  71. Garg A, Tai K (2013) Comparison of statistical and machine learning methods in modelling of data with multicollinearity. Int J Model Ident Control 18(4):295–312

    Google Scholar 

  72. Garg A, Tai K, Lee CH, Savalani MM. A Hybrid M5’-genetic programming approach for ensuring greater trustworthiness of prediction ability in modelling of FDM process, Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing (in press). doi:10.1007/s10845-013-0734-1.

  73. Garg A, Savalani MM, Tai K (in press) State-of-the-art in empirical modelling of rapid prototyping processes. Rapid Prototyping Journal

  74. Garg A, Tai K (2013) Selection of a robust experimental design for the effective modeling of the nonlinear systems using genetic programming. Proceedings of 2013 IEEE Symposium on Computational Intelligence and Data mining (CIDM), Singapore, 2013, pp 293–298

  75. Garg, A., Sriram, S., Tai K. (2013). Empirical analysis of model selection criteria for genetic programming in modeling of time series system. Proceedings of 2013 IEEE Conference on Computational Intelligence for Financial Engineering & Economics (CIFEr), Singapore, 2013, pp 84–88

  76. Kotanchek M, Smits G, Vladislavleva E (2008) Trustable symbolic regression models: using ensembles, interval arithmetic and pareto fronts to develop robust and trust-aware models. Genetic Programming Theory and Practice V, pp 201–220

  77. Kushchu I (2002) Genetic programming and evolutionary generalization. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 6:431–442

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Rowland J (2003) Model selection methodology in supervised learning with evolutionary computation. Biosystems 72:187–196

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Borges E, Alonso CL, Montana JL (2010) Model selection in genetic programming. Proceedings of 12th annual conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation ACM, pp 985–986

  80. Neseli S, Yaldiz S, Turkes E (2011) Optimization of tool geometry parameters for turning operations based on the response surface methodology. Measurement: J Int Measure Confederation 44:580–587

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. Kennard RW, Stone LA (1969) Computer aided design of experiments. Technometrics 11:137–148

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  82. May R, Maier HR, Dandy GC (2010) Data splitting for artificial neural networks using SOM-based stratified sampling. Neural Networks 23:283–294

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Saptoro A, Tade MO, Vuthaluru H (2012) A modified Kennard–Stone algorithm for optimal division of data for developing artificial neural network models. Chem Prod Process Model 7:13

    Google Scholar 

  84. Koza JR (1996) On the programming of computers by means of natural selection. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  85. Chen ZH, Xu BG, Chi ZR (2012) Mathematical formulation of knitted fabric spirality using genetic programming. Text Res J 82:667–676

    Article  Google Scholar 

  86. Searson DP, Leahy DE, Willis MJ (2010) GPTIPS: an open source genetic programming toolbox for multigene symbolic regression. Int MultiConfer Eng Comput Sci 2010 1:77–80

    Google Scholar 

  87. Hiden HG (1998) Data-based modelling using genetic programming. PhD thesis, Department of Chemical and Process Engineering, University of Newcastle, UK

  88. Hearst MA, Dumais S, Osman E, Platt J, Scholkopf B (1998) Support vector machines. Intelligent Systems and their Applications, IEEE 13:18–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  89. Byvatov E, Schneider G (2003) Support vector machine applications in bioinformatics. Appl Bioinforma 2:67–77

    Google Scholar 

  90. Kecman V (2001) Learning and soft computing: support vector machines, neural networks, and fuzzy logicmodels. MIT Press, Cambridge

  91. Vapnik V (1995) The nature of statistical learning. Springer, New York

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  92. Pelckmans K, Suykens JAK, Vangestel T, De Brabanter D, Lukas J, Hamers B et al (2002) LS-SVMlab: a matlab/c toolbox for least squares support vector machines. Tutorial. KULeuven-ESAT, Leuven

    Google Scholar 

  93. Patterson DW (1998) Artificial neural networks: theory and applications. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs

  94. Bustillo A et al (2011) Avoiding neural network fine tuning by using ensemble learning: application to ball-end milling operations. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 57(5–8):521–532

    Article  Google Scholar 

  95. Farahnakian M et al (2011) The selection of milling parameters by the PSO-based neural network modeling method. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 57(1–4):49–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  96. Yang CB, Deng CS, Chiang HL (2012) Combining the taguchi method with artificial neural network to construct a prediction model of a CO2 laser cutting experiment. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 59(9–12):1103–1111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  97. Zhang Y, Yang J, Jiang H (2012) Machine tool thermal error modeling and prediction by grey neural network. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 59(9–12):1065–1072

    Article  Google Scholar 

  98. Zinati RF, Razfar MR (2012) Constrained optimum surface roughness prediction in turning of X20Cr13 by coupling novel modified harmony search-based neural network and modified harmony search algorithm. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 58(1–4):93–107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  99. Gaitonde VN, Karnik SR, Figueira L, Davim JP (2011) Performance comparison of conventional and wiper ceramic inserts in hard turning through artificial neural network modeling. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 52:101–114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  100. Niaki STA, Akbari-Nasaji S (2011) A hybrid method of artificial neural networks and simulated annealing in monitoring auto-correlated multi-attribute processes. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 56:777–788

    Article  Google Scholar 

  101. Pontes FJ, Ferreira JR, Silva MB, Paiva AP, Balestrassi PP (2010) Artificial neural networks for machining processes surface roughness modeling. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 49:879–902

    Article  Google Scholar 

  102. Cherkassky V, Ma Y (2004) Practical selection of SVM parameters and noise estimation for SVM regression. Neural networks 17:113–126

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  103. Sall J, Ng K, Hecht M, Tilley D, Potter R, Corcoran B (1999). SAS Institute, Cary

  104. Yıldız AR (2013) Comparison of evolutionary-based optimization algorithms for structural design optimization. Eng Appl Artif Intel 26(1):327–333

    Article  Google Scholar 

  105. Yıldız AR (2012) A new hybrid particle swarm optimization approach for structural design optimization in automotive industry. Proc Inst Mechanical Eng, Part D: J Automobile Eng 226(10):1340–1351

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to K. Tai.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Garg, A., Rachmawati, L. & Tai, K. Classification-driven model selection approach of genetic programming in modelling of turning process. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 69, 1137–1151 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-013-5103-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-013-5103-x

Keywords

Navigation