MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2151651913 · doi:10.1109/wescan.1993.270515

Performance evaluation of flexible manufacturing systems using factorial design techniques

2002· article· en· W2151651913 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Manufacturing and Logistics Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Regina
KeywordsFlexible manufacturing systemAutomated guided vehicleScheduling (production processes)PalletMachiningComputer scienceFactorial experimentFeature (linguistics)Variable (mathematics)EngineeringArtificial intelligenceMachine learningMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors present the results of a simulation study of a flexible manufacturing system (FMS). The FMS considered includes ten machining centers capable of performing a variety of tasks, an automated guided vehicle (AGV) based material handling system, and an automated single-input-single-output storage-retrieval system connected to the manufacturing system by conveyors. The system manufactures a large part mix and the parts are transported within the system by the AGV on pallets. Alternate part routing, which is an integral feature of most present day FMS, has been included in the model of this system. The model for the present study accounts for uncertainties such as stochastic part arrival patterns, variable machining times, and machine breakdowns. The performance of the system has been investigated under difficult AGV availability conditions, operation time levels, scheduling rules, and layouts of the system using factorial design techniques. The time spent by parts in the system is considered one of the main criteria of system performance. Statistical methods are used to analyze the effects of these parameters on the system performance.< <ETX xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">&gt;</ETX>

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)0.000
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 score0.907
Threshold uncertainty score0.440

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.166 · 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