MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2003612330 · doi:10.1080/00207543.2011.631599

Two-sided U-type assembly line balancing problem

2011· article· en· W2003612330 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

VenueInternational Journal of Production Research · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAssembly Line Balancing Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAssembly lineType (biology)Integer programmingLine (geometry)Mathematical optimizationComputer scienceEngineeringMathematicsMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

U-type and two-sided assembly lines are two types of design having advantages over traditional straight assembly lines. In this paper, a new line design hybrid of U-type and two-sided lines is presented. A bi-objective 0-1 integer programming model is developed to solve the line balancing problem of the proposed design. Zoning constraints are also considered for the proposed design. A number of test problems from the literature with up to 65 tasks are solved. Benefits of two-sided U-type lines are 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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.427
Threshold uncertainty score0.425

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.279 · 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