MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1537572029 · doi:10.1109/icsmc.2003.1244578

Agent-based collaborative project management system for distributed manufacturing

2004· article· en· W1537572029 on OpenAlexaff
Shaohong Wu, Dilip Kotak

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicScheduling and Optimization Algorithms
Canadian institutionsBC Innovation CouncilNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceScheduleMulti-agent systemScheduling (production processes)Systems engineeringProject managementConcurrent engineeringSoftware engineeringDistributed manufacturingDistributed computingEngineeringManufacturing engineeringOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to address the dynamic requirements of project-based productions, this paper proposes a collaborative project scheduling and management system framework using a distributed multi-agent approach. This framework consists of three types of agents: L-Agents to enable integration with MRP/ERP and other legacy systems; P-Agents to schedule and manage the projects; and D-Agents to schedule, monitor and coordinate actual productions. These generic agents are dynamically deployed and customized at each location where a portion of the project is executed. An overall coordination is achieved through the communication and negotiation among these distributed agents. The proposed system enables project managers and others to effectively accommodate frequent engineering changes and other uncertainties while making an effective use of available distributed resources and fulfilling the customer requirements. A company manufacturing tools for sheet metal fabrications is used as an example to test and validate our prototype system. The prototyped system architecture is well suited for distributed problem solving applications and is adaptable to other application domains.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.218 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations30
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicScheduling and Optimization AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207