Physical programming and conjoint analysis-based redundancy allocation in multistate systems: A Taguchi embedded algorithm selection and control (TAS&C) approach
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
Amidst increasing system complexity and technological advancements, the manufacturer aims to win the consumer's trust to maintain his or her permanent goodwill. This expectation directs the manufacturer to address the problem of attaining desired quality and reliability standards; hence, the measure of performance of a system in terms of reliability and utility optimization poses an issue of primary concern. In order to meet the requirement of a reliable and trouble-free product, optimal allocation of all conflicting parameters is essential during the design phase of a system. With this in mind, this paper presents a physical programming and conjoint analysis-based redundancy allocation model (PPCA-RAM) for a multistate series—parallel system. Use of physical programming approach is the key feature of the proposed algorithm to eliminate the need for multi-objective optimization. Physical programming methodology provides an adequate balance among various associated performance measures and thus provides an efficient tool for formulating the objective function of a practical redundancy allocation problem. The proposed model has been addressed by a novel methodology called Taguchi embedded algorithm selection and control (TAS&C). An illustrative example has been presented to authenticate the efficiency of the proposed model and algorithm. The results obtained are compared with the genetic algorithm (GA), artificial immune system (AIS), and particle swarm optimization (PSO), where TAS&C was seen to significantly outperform the rest.
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 | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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