I start by writing a unit test that feeds every model into the slicer and compares the output against the analytical solution for each layer, checking area, volume and perimeter to within a strict epsilon. If any slice falls outside that threshold I log the exact discrepancy, halt the run and trace the calculation back to the source. The code uses high‑precision arithmetic for the layer boundaries, and every seam position is deterministically chosen to avoid bias, so every slice is mathematically perfect.

I agree, the math is only half the battle. I run a calibration cube with a spiral wall and a flat plate side by side. I measure the first layer thickness with a feeler gauge and the wall height with a micrometer, then log the deviation from the target. The slicer reads those offsets and injects a bed‑level correction and an extrusion multiplier tweak. I also script a test routine that prints a small “warp‑meter” object and flags any axis drift. That way the slicer stays sharp, and the printer’s quirks are mapped out and corrected automatically.

I’ll hard‑code the warp tolerance into the slicer and run a regression on a hundred past prints to predict the exact correction needed before the first layer even starts. The nozzle gets a self‑clean cycle on every print, so there’s no chance of a residue shortcut. If anything deviates from the model, the slicer aborts and logs the event for a deeper audit. No war crimes, just zero‑margin tolerance.