MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1978542154 · doi:10.1109/ptc.2005.4524593

A probabilistic approach to life cycle management

2005· article· en· W1978542154 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReliability and Maintenance Optimization
Canadian institutionsKinectrics (Canada)
FundersUniwersytet Łódzki
KeywordsProbabilistic logicComputer scienceMonte Carlo methodContinuationReliability engineeringProduct life-cycle managementComponent (thermodynamics)Simple (philosophy)Process (computing)Production (economics)Operations researchExponential functionWork (physics)Mathematical optimizationIndustrial engineeringEngineeringMathematicsArtificial intelligenceStatisticsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The work described in this paper is a continuation of previous studies. A simple approach is presented to evaluating the costs over the life cycle of a system, structure or component under various maintenance policies. The process of comparing and analyzing the economics of alternative maintenance plans is called Life Cycle Management. The goal is to identify the policy where the total cost of repairs, maintenance, lost production and consequential expenses (expressed in their present values) is the lowest. The novel feature of the approach is that it is based on Monte Carlo simulations, permitting the use of time distributions other than exponential. Steps of the calculations are discussed and, in the end, typical output information is shown consisting of several graphs and tabulations.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.824
Threshold uncertainty score0.251

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.184
Teacher spread0.177 · 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

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicReliability and Maintenance OptimizationFrench-language works237,207