MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2283779348

An improved two-stage optimization-based framework for unequal-areas facility layout

2015· article· en· W2283779348 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.

Bibliographic record

VenuePolyPublie (École Polytechnique de Montréal) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Manufacturing and Logistics Optimization
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalGroup for Research in Decision Analysis
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFacility location problemMathematical optimizationComputer sciencePosition (finance)Optimization problemScale (ratio)Regular polygonMathematics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The unequal-areas facility layout problem is concerned with finding the optimal arrangement of a given number of non-overlapping indivisible departments with unequal area requirements within a facility. We present an improved optimization-based framework for efficiently finding competitive solutions for this problem. The framework is based on the combination of two mathematical optimization models. The first model is a nonlinear approximation of the problem that establishes the relative position of the departments within the facility, and the second model is an exact convex optimization formulation of the problem that determines the final layout. Aspect ratio constraints on the departments are taken into account by both models. Our computational results show that the proposed framework is computationally efficient and consistently produces competitive, and often improved, layouts for well-known instances from the literature as well as for new large-scale instances with up to 100 departments.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.487
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.240 · 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