MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2086941066 · doi:10.1080/0740817x.2012.654845

Manufacturing system design by considering multiple machine replacements under discounted costs

2012· article· en· W2086941066 on OpenAlexaff
Nima Safaei, Ali Zuashkiani

Bibliographic record

VenueIIE Transactions · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Manufacturing and Logistics Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematical optimizationTime horizonBounding overwatchBranch and boundInteger programmingActivity-based costingHeuristicProcess (computing)Computer scienceRouting (electronic design automation)Holding costOperations researchHeuristicsReliability engineeringIndustrial engineeringEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article investigates the effect of equipment replacement on the design phase of multi-machine manufacturing systems, given a finite horizon and discounted costs. For the most part, the manufacturing system design literature has focused on the design issue, ignoring equipment replacement and its economic impact. The design phase generally consists of equipment selection, process routing, and layout decisions. The authors propose an explicit mathematical form for the operating costs of equipment and their salvage values based on their previous experience of life cycle costing projects. The design phase of cellular manufacturing systems, the so-called cell formation problem, is used. The problem is formulated as a non-linear mixed-integer programming model and solved using a proposed branch-and-bound algorithm. The algorithm employs a depth-first branching strategy in conjunction with a bounding procedure with a heuristic method. Selected numerical examples demonstrate the applicability of the model and verify the performance of the proposed algorithm. The results enable the best equipment mix and product process routes to be chosen based on the given horizon and economic factors; in addition, information is obtained about which equipment should be replaced and at what time point this replacement should occur.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations4
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIIE TransactionsSame topicAdvanced Manufacturing and Logistics OptimizationFrench-language works237,207