MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2071490564 · doi:10.1016/s0278-6125(08)00002-2

Quality prediction in manufacturing system design

2006· article· en· W2071490564 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 Systems · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicManufacturing Process and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuality (philosophy)Manufacturing engineeringEngineeringReliability engineeringComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Expected product quality is affected by manufacturing system design decisions. Product quality prediction would allow a manufacturer to make better choices of system parameters at the early design stage and, hence, enhance competitiveness through achieving higher quality levels. A Configuration Capability Indicator (CCI) that maps the manufacturing system configuration parameters into an expected product quality level has been developed. A hierarchical fuzzy inference system was developed for modeling the relationship between manufacturing system design parameters and the resulting product quality level. A configuration capability zone is proposed to graphically represent the configuration capability, for a system configuration that produces more than one product, and compare it to the benchmark six-sigma capability. The developed model has been applied to two case studies (Test Parts ANC-90 and ANC-101, and Rack Bar Machining) with different system configurations for illustration and verification. The results demonstrate the ability of the CCI to compare different system configurations from a quality point of view and to support the decision-making during the early stages of manufacturing system planning and design.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.809
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.199 · 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