Supportive role of the simulation in the process of ship engine crankcase production process of reengineering (case study)
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The following paper presents the results of a case study conducted in a company producing engines for ships. The scope of the research enhances the elaboration of the method of reengineering the production process with the support of simulation. Authors present the background of the research including the comparative analysis of five different reengineering methodologies. On analysis, the conclusion is defined that there is a gap in reengineering methodologies since they do not account for industry-based requirements for simulation. To fulfill this gap the Petri nets application for simulation was proposed. Authors discuss the most distinctive elements of a Petri net and define the methodology of manufacturing processes modeling. The obtained output was not sufficient to make a final decision about the real reengineering process. Therefore, an additional analysis with rapid RE (rapid reengineering) methodology was performed. The proposal of the potential hybrid solution combining the advantages of both methods, i.e. Petri Net and rapid RE, is presented.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it