MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2066074156 · doi:10.1109/tr.2015.2421819

Periodic Inspection Optimization of a k-Out-of-n Load-Sharing System

2015· article· en· W2066074156 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

VenueIEEE Transactions on Reliability · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReliability and Maintenance Optimization
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLoad sharingInterval (graph theory)Component (thermodynamics)Reliability engineeringPoisson distributionFunction (biology)HazardProcess (computing)Moment (physics)Poisson processMathematical optimizationInterval arithmeticComputer scienceMathematicsEngineeringDistributed computingStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we consider a k-out-of-n load-sharing system with n identical components sharing a certain amount of load. Each time a component fails, its load is distributed to the remaining components; we assume an increase in load increases the hazard rates of the remaining components. The system is periodically inspected to detect failed components. Two cases may occur in an inspection interval: if the number of failed components is less than n-k+1, then the failed components are only rectified at periodic inspections; if the number of failures reaches n-k+1, then the system fails, and at this time, all the failed components are inspected and rectified. A failed component is replaced or minimally repaired according to a probability which depends on its age at the failure time. The components' failures follow a Non-Homogenous Poisson Process (NHPP), and their intensity functions depend on their ages and the loads to which they are exposed at any moment. In this paper, we develop a model to find the optimal inspection interval for such a system, which minimizes the total expected cost incurred over the system lifecycle. We derive the analytical solution for the special case of a 1-out-of-2 system, and discuss its computational difficulties. We then present a simulation algorithm to find the required expected values in the objective function. Several numerical examples are presented to illustrate the proposed model.

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)0.001
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 score0.892
Threshold uncertainty score0.674

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.204 · 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