Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Purpose: This study addresses the small data challenge in additive manufacturing, where destructive tensile testing limits sample size (n = 81), by developing and validating a probabilistic synthetic data generation pipeline. Design, Method, and Approach: A twelve-stage framework couples Gaussian Process Regression (GPR) with three-tier validation. Infill patterns are one-hot encoded, process parameters are sampled uniformly within physical bounds, and synthetic ultimate tensile strength (UTS) is generated with uncertainty-guided noise (γ = 0.3). Fidelity is assessed through distributional, structural, and Train–Synthetic Test–Real (TSTR) tests using XGBoost, Random Forest, and GPR. Results: GPR expanded the dataset 617-fold to 50,000 synthetic observations (1000 used for validation), preserving the dominant infill–UTS dependence, while agreement for other features varied. Models trained on synthetic data reached a physical test R2 of 0.8895 (XGBoost) and 0.9185 (Random Forest), 3.61 and 1.02 percentage points below the experimental baselines (0.9256 and 0.9287); GPR reached 0.9425. Originality: Combining one-hot encoding, bounded sampling, and multi-tier validation, this work shows that probabilistic synthetic data can complement physical specimens when training machine learning surrogates.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hiremath et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: