Developing a quantitative risk-based methodology for maintenance scheduling using Bayesian Network
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The main objective of the maintenance process is to increase equipments life while maintaining the safety and reliability of the process systems. The maintenance planning concerns identification of what and how to inspect, how often to inspect, and what maintenance actions to be taken. Even though the maintenance may be used as an effective means for controlling the degradation of systems, the procedures may also have considerable impact on the operation. It results in direct and indirect economic consequences in terms of shutdowns and unavailability of systems. Therefore, it is necessary to plan maintenance such that a balance is achieved between the expected benefit and the corresponding economic consequences implied by these activities. The objective of this research is to integrate predictive and preventive maintenance strategies in an optimal way to maintain the desired availability and safety integrity level while minimizing the maintenance intervals. The outcome of this work would help to conserve resources while maintaining overall system availability and the safety. The results showed that the risk-based methodology developed using Bayesian Network increases the reliability of the equipment and also optimizes the cost of maintenance. Application of the developed methodology is demonstrated on the maintenance of a power plant as a case study.
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 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 it