MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2598668330 · doi:10.3233/978-1-61499-119-9-149

Scheduling a hybrid flowshop with parallel machines for aircraft assembly production

2012· book-chapter· en· W2598668330 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

VenueIOS Press eBooks · 2012
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicScheduling and Optimization Algorithms
Canadian institutionsBombardier (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceScheduling (production processes)Parallel computingEngineeringOperations management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The new P2/HFS|Prec|Cmaxscheduling problem is found within an aerospace fuselage manufacturing environment and is a combinatorial problem addressed using dispatching rules. A newly proposed dispatching rule, named ‘batch and match’, was created by exploiting the combined elements of a) product assembly characteristics and b) processing time on a shared resource, is used to find solutions for minimizing makespan and waiting time for ten fuselage sets. A new manufacturing tool incorporates models for calculation of makespan and waiting time in the system. The best schedule, found using the new dispatching rule and a weighting system for ranking makespan and waiting time, was DCAB (LI), this schedule gives a reduced makespan of 2.61% against the benchmark longest imminent operation rule. The DCAB (LI) schedule also shows a reduction in waiting time of 53.5% per fuselage set created. This ‘batch and match’ dispatching method performs better than other rules and offers a solution to shared resources that limit processing in hybrid flowshops with precedence constraints.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.210
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.203 · 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