MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004918350 · doi:10.1081/qen-120020778

Applying Real-Time Statistical Process Control to Manufacturing Processes Exhibiting Between and Within Part Size Variability in the Wood Products Industry

2003· article· en· W2004918350 on OpenAlexaff
Thomas C. Maness, Robert Kozak, Christina L. Staudhammer

Bibliographic record

VenueQuality Engineering · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicAdvanced Statistical Process Monitoring
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStatistical process controlControl chartProcess (computing)Process variationVariation (astronomy)EngineeringVariance (accounting)Process controlSampling (signal processing)Industrial engineeringControl (management)Statistical analysisComputer scienceManufacturing engineeringStatisticsMathematicsArtificial intelligenceTelecommunicationsAccounting

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we develop a control charting procedure to monitor average part size, as well as between and within part size variation for sawn lumber in an automated lumbermill. We present a review of the sawing process followed by a discussion of sampling methods for a real-time noncontact laser measuring device. A statistical model based on the components of variation analysis of variance model is proposed both for the analysis of the data and the construction of control charts that can be used to monitor the process. The details of the resulting statistical process control system are developed and an example from the lumber industry is provided and compared to other possible approaches. The resulting techniques may have applicability in many other industries where within and between variation in processes occurs.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.315 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations7
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQuality EngineeringSame topicAdvanced Statistical Process MonitoringFrench-language works237,207