Maintenance strategies: Decision Making Grid vs Jack-Knife Diagram
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
Purpose Maintenance management is a vital strategic task given the increasing demand on sustained availability of machines. Machine performance depends primarily on frequency and downtime; therefore, ranking critical machines based on these two criteria is important to determine the appropriate maintenance strategy. The purpose of this paper is to compare two methods, using case studies, to allocate maintenance strategies while prioritising performance based on frequency and downtime or Mean Time to Repair: the Decision Making Grid (DMG) and Jack-Knife Diagram (JKD). Design/methodology/approach The literature indicates the need for an approach able to integrate maintenance performance and strategy in order to adapt existing data on equipment failures and to routinely adjust preventive measures. Maintenance strategies are incomparable; one strategy should not be applied to all machines, nor all strategies to the same machine. Findings Compared to the Pareto histogram, the DMG and JKD provide visual representations of the performance of the worst machines with respect to frequency and downtime, thus allowing maintenance technicians to apply the appropriate maintenance strategy. Each method has its own merits. Research limitations/implications This work compares only two methods based on their original conceptualisation. This is due to their similarities in using same input data and their main features. However, there is a scope to compare to other methods or variations of these methods. Practical implications This paper highlights how the DMG and JKD can be incorporated in industrial applications to allocate appropriate maintenance strategy and track machine performance over time. Originality/value Neither DMG nor JKD have been compared in the literature. Currently, the JKD has been used to rank machines, and the DMG has been used to determine maintenance strategies.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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