MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Efficient aircraft spare parts inventory management under demand uncertainty

2014· article· en· W1975782246 on OpenAlexafffund
Jingyao Gu, Guoqing Zhang, Kevin Li

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Air Transport Management · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReliability and Maintenance Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSpare partMean time between failuresOperations researchReorder pointEconomic shortageComputer scienceTotal costPoint (geometry)Economic order quantityOrder (exchange)Reduction (mathematics)Reliability engineeringMathematical optimizationLinear programmingCost reductionOperations managementFailure rateEngineeringMathematicsEconomicsSupply chainAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In airline industries, the aircraft maintenance cost takes up about 13% of the total operating cost. It can be reduced by a good planning. Spare parts inventories exist to serve the maintenance planning. Compared with commonly used reorder point system (ROP) and forecasting methods which only consider historical data, this paper presents two non-linear programming models which predict impending demands based on installed parts failure distribution. The optimal order time and order quantity can be found by minimizing total cost. The first basic mathematical model assumes shortage period starts from mean time to failure (MTTF). An iteration method and GAMS are used to solve this model. The second improved mathematical model takes into account accurate shortage time. Due to its complexity, only GAMS is applied in solution methodology. Both models can be proved effective in cost reduction through revised numerical examples and their results. Comparisons of the two models are also discussed.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.183 · 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

Citations84
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Air Transport ManagementSame topicReliability and Maintenance OptimizationFrench-language works237,207