Dependability-Based Design Optimization of Degrading Engineering Systems
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we present a methodology that helps select the distribution parameters in degrading multiresponse systems to improve dependability at the lowest lifetime cost. The dependability measures include both quality (soft failures) and reliability (hard failures). Associated costs of scrap, rework, and warrantee work are included. The key to the approach is the fast and efficient creation of the system cumulative distribution function through a series of time-variant limit-state functions. Probabilities are evaluated by Monte Carlo simulation although the first-order reliability method is a viable alternative. The cost objective function that is common in reliability-based design optimization is expanded to include a lifetime loss of performance cost, herein based on present worth theory (also called present value theory). An optimum design in terms of distribution parameters of the design variables is found via a methodology that involves minimizing cost under performance policy constraints over the lifetime as the system degrades. A case study of an over-run clutch provides the insights and potential of the proposed methodology.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it