MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2072947809 · doi:10.1139/l09-072

Formulation of a pull production system for optimal inventory control of temporary rebar assembly plants

2009· article· en· W2072947809 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Keon Soon Im, Seung Heon Han, Bonsang Koo, Do Young Jung

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAssembly Line Balancing Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAgencia Estatal de Investigación
KeywordsProcurementRebarInventory controlProduction (economics)Precast concreteControl (management)Computer scienceRaw materialOperations managementOperations researchReliability engineeringManufacturing engineeringEngineeringBusinessCivil engineeringEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Temporary fabrication plants such as rebar assembly and precast segment shops are increasingly used in large scale construction projects to provide a construction site of its material needs. A plant needs to be operated in such a way that it is flexible enough to adapt to changing project demands while minimizing inventories. Meeting such needs requires careful control of the level of raw materials and assembly products fabricated in the plant, the two main types of inventories. However, in practice the ordering of raw materials and assembly times are ad hoc, leading to excess inventories and added costs to the project. This paper presents a methodology for effective, efficient, and economic control of inventory levels in temporary rebar assembly plants. Ordering processes are formalized to convert existing approaches into a pull production system. Given this transformation, a methodology is presented that employs Monte Carlo simulation and optimization techniques to identify inventory levels that minimize inventory costs while simulating variability in demand, procurement lead times, and production capacity. A retrospective case on a rebar assembly plant shows that the same amount of work can be performed with significantly less inventory levels when applying the proposed production methodology. It also provides evidence that the cost savings from inventory costs outweigh any additional holding or delivery costs associated with a pull production system.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.183
Teacher spread0.176 · 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

Citations14
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicAssembly Line Balancing OptimizationFrench-language works237,207