MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2071713280 · doi:10.1002/nav.20051

A robust policy for serial agile production systems

2004· article· en· W2071713280 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

VenueNaval Research Logistics (NRL) · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicScheduling and Optimization Algorithms
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMarkovian arrival processComputer scienceAgile software developmentProduction (economics)Process (computing)Upstream (networking)Focus (optics)Operations researchArrival timeWorkstationMathematical optimizationMarkov processMarkov decision processQueueing theoryIndustrial engineeringEconomicsMathematicsMicroeconomicsStatisticsTelecommunicationsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract One of the major problems in modeling production systems is how to treat the job arrival process. Restrictive assumptions such as Markovian arrivals do not represent real world systems, especially if the arrival process is generated by job departures from upstream workstations. Under these circumstances, cost‐effective policies that are robust with respect to the nature of the arrival process become of interest. In this paper, we focus on minimizing the expected total holding and setup costs in a two‐stage produce‐to‐order production system operated by a cross‐trained worker. We will show that if setup times are insignificant in comparison with processing times, then near‐optimal policies can be generated with very robust performances with respect to the arrival process. We also present conditions under which these near‐optimal policies can be obtained by using only the arrival and service rates. © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Naval Research Logistics, 2005.

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)0.004
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.889
Threshold uncertainty score0.537

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.159
GPT teacher head0.366
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