MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2323732138 · doi:10.1061/9780784413517.171

Strategies for Optimizing Labor Resource Planning on Plant Shutdown and Turnaround

2014· article· en· W2323732138 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueConstruction Research Congress 2014 · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicResource-Constrained Project Scheduling
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrewTurnaround timeDuration (music)Operations managementContext (archaeology)Scheduling (production processes)Operations researchComputer scienceEngineeringAeronautics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The complexities inherent in scheduling the execution of process plant turnaround projects present distinctive challenges to project managers in identifying the shortest project duration while determining the optimum crew size. In collaboration with a major plant turnaround contractor in Alberta, we monitored the execution of an oil refinery turnaround project. We looked into management processes in regard to turnaround project schedules development and skilled-labor resource allocation. This research conceptualizes a labor resource provision optimization methodology in the complex and dynamic context of turnaround scheduling to objectively quantify and reduce the crew size. The optimum quantities of specialty trades to be employed in the field can be determined objectively so as to staff a crew with sufficient skilled-labor resources while also minimizing the duration in executing a turnaround work package.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.566
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
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 head0.188
GPT teacher head0.453
Teacher spread0.265 · 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