MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2101166479

Electroplating Line Flexible Control using P-Time Petri Nets Modeling and Hoist Waiting Times Calculation

2008· article· en· W2101166479 on OpenAlexaff
Fatah Chetouane

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational journal of industrial engineering · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicScheduling and Optimization Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Moncton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHoist (device)Petri netScheduling (production processes)Computer scienceReal-time computingReliability engineeringSimulationControl theory (sociology)EngineeringDistributed computingOperations managementControl (management)Mechanical engineeringArtificial intelligence
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In automated electroplating lines, product quality depends on soak times in chemical tanks while line throughput depends on hoist moves cycle time. These parameters are antagonistic since on-line tuning of cycle time interferes with processing duration and thus quality, and vice versa. Furthermore, on-line tuning actions performed without exploiting process flexibility may affect hoist moves schedule feasibility and call for complex scheduling at the on-line level. In this paper a flexible control for electroplating lines (EPL) is proposed that allows quality and throughput tuning within calculated margins and with no need for hoist moves rescheduling. Firstly a P-time Petri Nets (P-time PNs) tool is used to model hoist move sequence. Afterwards, linear programs (LP) are proposed to determine cycle time and soak times tuning margins without the need to reschedule hoist moves. Flexibility will be achieved using empty-hoist wait times.

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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations5
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational journal of industrial engineeringSame topicScheduling and Optimization AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207