MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2097714267 · doi:10.1109/robot.1991.131794

Resource allocation in a flexible manufacturing system by graph matching

2002· article· en· W2097714267 on OpenAlexaff
H.C. Shen, Jeremy Hodgson, G. R. Heppler

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicScheduling and Optimization Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceMatching (statistics)GraphFlexible manufacturing systemResource allocationBlossom algorithmDistributed computingCardinality (data modeling)Theoretical computer scienceMathematical optimizationData miningMathematicsComputer networkScheduling (production processes)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Resource allocation in a flexible manufacturing system (FMS), such as assignment of resources to tasks, can be solved efficiently using graph matching methods. The FMS is modeled as a graph: the vertices are resources and tasks, and the edges ar relationships between the resources and tasks. Resources are allocated by finding a match in the graph. The general matching problem is reviewed as an optimization problem; the more specific maximum cardinality 1-matching problem is discussed in detail. A direct parallelization of an algorithm is described which may be regarded as an archetype for implementation on a distributed network of computers in a large FMS. In such an FMS, planning activities such as resource allocation are decentralized, allowing for quicker and more detailed planning.>

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)0.002
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
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.190
Teacher spread0.180 · 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
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicScheduling and Optimization AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207