MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2134421244 · doi:10.1287/inte.1040.0067

General Motors Optimizes Its Scheduling of Cold-Weather Tests

2004· article· en· W2134421244 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueINFORMS Journal on Applied Analytics · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Reliability and Analysis Research
Canadian institutionsGeneral Motors (Canada)
FundersOregon State University
KeywordsWarrantyScheduling (production processes)ScheduleOperations researchCold weatherEngineeringGeneral motorsComputer scienceAutomotive engineeringTransport engineeringOperations managementOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The General Motors Cold Weather Development Center is responsible for performing vehicle road tests under excessively cold weather conditions; each vehicle must undergo a specified number of tests under various temperatures in specified sequences. The center usually completes a vehicle's tests over several weeks based on such factors as the number of days cold enough to provide meaningful results. The center prepares a master test schedule daily with the goals of maximizing overall efficiency, assigning enough tests to each vehicle, and respecting operating constraints. To address this scheduling problem, we developed a decision-support tool with a specialized heuristic. Implementing the tool improved throughput by more than 100 percent and saved millions of dollars in vehicle warranty cost.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.559
Threshold uncertainty score0.605

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.261 · 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