Real-time data-driven average active period method for bottleneck detection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Prioritising improvement and maintenance activities is an important part of the production management and development process. Companies need to direct their efforts to the production constraints (bottlenecks) to achieve higher productivity. The first step is to identify the bottlenecks in the production system. A majority of the current bottleneck detection techniques can be classified into two categories, based on the methods used to develop the techniques: analytical and simulation based. Analytical methods are difficult to use in more complex multi-stepped production systems, and simulation-based approaches are time-consuming and less flexible with regard to changes in the production system. This research paper introduces a real-time, data-driven algorithm, which examines the average active period of the machines (the time when the machine is not waiting) to identify the bottlenecks based on real-time shop floor data captured by Manufacturing Execution Systems (MES). The method utilises machine state information and the corresponding time stamps of those states as recorded by MES. The algorithm has been tested on a real-time MES data set from a manufacturing company. The advantage of this algorithm is that it works for all kinds of production systems, including flow-oriented layouts and parallel-systems, and does not require a simulation model of the production system.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".