MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2296199082 · doi:10.1504/ijmr.2015.069715

A cost-based model to select best capacity scaling policy for reconfigurable manufacturing systems

2015· article· en· W2296199082 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

VenueInternational Journal of Manufacturing Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFlexible and Reconfigurable Manufacturing Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScalingComputer scienceReliability engineeringIndustrial engineeringEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study presents a system dynamics approach to model and analyse a single stage reconfigurable manufacturing system (RMS). The system is exposed to a random demand that follow a normal distribution. New modifications to the existing state of the art capacity scaling model are applied to bring it closer to reality. A module to account capacity scaling costs and a module for considering seasonal demand are introduced. The objective of this study is to evaluate the performance of different capacity scaling policies for various system scenarios. Experimentations are applied on three stages; preliminary experimentation, Taguchi fractional factorial design, and 24 full factorial design to conduct various system scenarios. Two policy selection rules are produced to help a practitioner in deciding the best scaling policy according to the existing system scenario. The results showed that chasing demand policy and inventory-based policy have the best performance for most system scenarios. [Received 13 March 2014; Revised 26 November 2014; Accepted 26 January 2015]

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.818
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.214
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.170 · 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