MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2023345879 · doi:10.1057/palgrave.jors.2601261

Optimal component replacement decisions using vibration monitoring and the proportional-hazards model

2002· article· en· W2023345879 on OpenAlexaff
P. J. Vlok, Jasper L. Coetzee, Dragan Banjević, Andrew Jardine, Viliam Makiš

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Operational Research Society · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReliability and Maintenance Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWeibull distributionContext (archaeology)PurchasingComputer sciencePreventive maintenanceReliability engineeringOperations researchOperations managementEngineeringStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes a case study in which the Weibull proportional-hazards model is used to determine the optimal replacement policy for a critical item which is subject to vibration monitoring. Such an approach has been used to date in the context of monitoring through oil debris analysis, and this approach is extended in this paper to the vibration monitoring context. The Weibull proportional-hazards model is reviewed along with the software EXAKT used for optimization. In particular the case considers condition-based maintenance for circulating pumps in a coal wash plant that is part of the SASOL petrochemical company. The condition-based maintenance policy recommended in this study is based on histories collected over a period of 2 years, and is compared with current practice. The policy is validated using data that arose from subsequent operation of the plant.

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)0.008
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations157
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Operational Research SocietySame topicReliability and Maintenance OptimizationFrench-language works237,207