MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2088495516 · doi:10.1093/imaman/dpn016

A maintenance model with minimal and general repair

2008· article· en· W2088495516 on OpenAlexaff
M. J. Kim, Viliam Makiš

Bibliographic record

VenueIMA Journal of Management Mathematics · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReliability and Maintenance Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOptimal maintenancePreventive maintenanceComputer scienceReliability engineeringMaintenance actionsMathematical optimizationMinificationMarkov decision processExtension (predicate logic)Operations researchMarkov processMathematicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this article is to determine optimal maintenance policies for deteriorating systems subject to failure. Complex systems that deteriorate with usage and age are often subject to random failures of several kinds. Since it is costly to repair or replace failed systems, preventive maintenance is usually carried out while the systems are still operational. This article will be useful in providing maintenance engineers with a methodology to model failing systems and efficiently determine optimal maintenance policies. The problem is formulated and solved in a semi-Markov decision framework with the optimality criterion being the minimization of the long-run expected average cost per unit time. The model developed in this article, which is an extension of recent maintenance models, can be applied to systems that have any finite number of major and/or minor failure states and to systems that permit general repair in operational and major failure states. A new computational approach using an embedded technique is developed that is computationally preferable to the standard policy iteration algorithm when determining the optimal maintenance policy for systems with many states.

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)0.003
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.178 · 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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIMA Journal of Management MathematicsSame topicReliability and Maintenance OptimizationFrench-language works237,207