Concurrent Optimization of Product Module Selection and Assembly Line Configuration: A Multi-Objective Approach
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Both modular product design and reconfigurable manufacturing have a great potential to enhance responsiveness to market changes and to reduce production cost. However, the two issues have thus far mostly been investigated separately, thereby causing possible mismatch between the modular product structure and the manufacturing or assembly system. Therefore, the potential benefits of product modularity may not be materialized due to such mismatch. For this reason, this paper presents a concurrent approach to the product module selection and assembly line design problems to provide a set of harmonic solutions to the two problems and hence avoid the mismatch between design and manufacturing. The integrated nature of the problem leads to several noncommensurable and often conflicting objectives. The modified Chebyshev goal programming approach is applied to solve the multi-objective problem. A genetic algorithm is further developed to provide quick and near-optimum solutions. The proposed approach and the solution procedure have been applied to an ABS motor problem. The performance of the genetic algorithm has also been examined.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it