Probability Constrained Optimization as a Tool for Functional Design for Six Sigma
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
ABSTRACT An important up-stream activity in the overall design of a system is the so-called functional design wherein the means and tolerances of the design variables are determined with respect to the competing demands of quality and cost. In this article probability constrained optimization is invoked to produce a functional design that focuses on the goal of design for Six Sigma (i.e., improved customer satisfaction, robustness, and predictable cost levels). Herein, a maximum system probability of nonconformance is obtained from a prescribed defect rate that in turn provides the primary design constraint. The production cost provides the objective function to be minimized in order to allocate the design parameters. All three quality metrics (e.g., target/larger/smaller-is-best) and robustness are inherent in the approach. The design of an electro-mechanical servo system serves as a case study wherein three responses are related to three control variables and two noise variables by mechanistic models. Designs for selected defect rates show the practicality and potential of the approach.
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 | 0.019 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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