MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2601490499 · doi:10.5267/j.dsl.2017.2.004

Sensitivity analysis of repairable redundant system with switching failure and geometric reneging

2017· article· en· W2601490499 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chandra Shekhar, Madhu Jain, Ather Aziz Raina, Rajesh P. Mishra

Bibliographic record

VenueDecision Science Letters · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReliability and Maintenance Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSensitivity (control systems)Computer scienceReliability engineeringMathematical optimizationMathematicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study deals with the performance modeling and reliability analysis of a redundant machining system composed of several functional machines. To analyze the more realistic scenarios, the concepts of switching failure and geometric reneging are included. The time-to-breakdown and repair time of operating and standby machines are assumed to follow the exponential distribution. For the quantitative assessment of the machine interference problem, various performance measures such as mean-time-to-failure, reliability, reneging rate, etc. have been formulated. To show the practicability of the developed model, a numerical illustration has been presented. For the practical justification and validity of the results established, the sensitivity analysis of reliability indices has been presented by varying different system descriptors.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations20
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDecision Science LettersSame topicReliability and Maintenance OptimizationFrench-language works237,207