MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2071173580 · doi:10.1108/17410380410547843

Comprehensive machine cell/part family formation using genetic algorithms

2004· article· en· W2071173580 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

VenueJournal of Manufacturing Technology Management · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Manufacturing and Logistics Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrossoverGenetic algorithmMeasure (data warehouse)Binary numberPopulationMutationAlgorithmComputer scienceQuality (philosophy)Quality control and genetic algorithmsMathematical optimizationMathematicsData miningArtificial intelligenceMeta-optimizationArithmetic

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The solution quality of a comprehensive machine/part grouping problem, where the processing times, lot sizes and machine capacities are considered, may not be properly evaluated using a binary performance measure. This paper suggests a generalized grouping efficacy index which has been compared favorably with two binary performance measures. A genetic algorithm using the generalized performance measure as the objective is developed to solve the comprehensive grouping problems. The algorithm has been tested using a number of reference problems with processing times being randomly assigned to all operations. The effects of three major genetic parameters (population size, mutation rate and the number of crossover points) have also been examined. The results indicate that, when the computational time is fixed, larger population size and lower mutation rate tend to improve solution quality while the number of crossover points has no significant impact on the final solution.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.900
Threshold uncertainty score0.866

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.207 · 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