Age-dependent production and replacement strategies in failure-prone manufacturing systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A failure-prone manufacturing system that consists of one machine producing one type of product is studied. The random phenomena examined are machine breakdowns and repairs. We assume that the machine undergoes a progressive deterioration while in operation and that the machine failure rate is a function of its age. The aging of the machine (the dynamics of the machine age) is assumed to be an increasing function of its production rate. Corrective maintenance activities are imperfect and restore the age of the machine to as-bad-as-old conditions. When a failure occurs, the machine can be repaired, and during production, the machine can be replaced, depending on its age. When the replacement action is selected, the machine is replaced by a new and identical one. The decision variables are the production rate and the replacement policy. The objective of this article is to address the simultaneous production and replacement policy optimization problem in the context of manufacturing with deterioration and imperfect repairs satisfying the customer demand and minimizing the total cost, which includes costs associated with inventory, backlog, production, repair and replacement, over an infinite planning horizon. We thoroughly explore the impact of the machine aging on the production and replacement policies. Particular attention is paid to the verification of underlying mathematical results that guarantee the existence of optimal solutions and the convergence of numerical methods. Due to imperfect repairs, the dynamics of the system is affected by the system history, and semi-Markov processes have to be used for modeling. Optimality conditions in the form of the Hamilton–Jacobi–Bellman equations are developed, and numerical methods are used to obtain the optimal control policies (production (rate) and replacement policies). A numerical example is given to illustrate the proposed approach, and an extensive sensitivity analysis is presented to confirm the structure of the obtained control policies.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".