MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2791281269 · doi:10.1080/21693277.2017.1422812

Optimal planning of buffer sizes and inspection station positions

2018· article· en· W2791281269 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammed Ouzineb, Fatima Zahra Mhada, Robert Pellerin, Issmaïl El Hallaoui

Bibliographic record

VenueProduction & Manufacturing Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAdvanced Queuing Theory Analysis
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalGroup for Research in Decision Analysis
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSizingMathematical optimizationConvexityComputer scienceProduction lineBuffer (optical fiber)Line (geometry)Integer (computer science)Series (stratigraphy)AlgorithmMathematicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The problem of buffer sizing and inspection stations positioning in unreliable production lines is a complex mixed integer nonlinear optimization problem. In this problem, we have a production line with n machines and n fixed-size (storage) buffers in series. The machines produce parts that are either conforming or nonconforming, and the line includes inspection stations that reject the nonconforming pats. The goal is to find the optimal buffer sizes, the number and positions of the inspection stations, and satisfy the customer demand on conforming parts while minimizing the total cost. We present in this paper an exact method to solve this complex manufacturing problem. We also present new theoretical results on buffer-size bounds, stationarity, and cost function convexity permitting to significantly reduce the problem complexity. These theoretical and algorithmic developments allow solving to optimality instances with up to 30 machines tools developed previously cannot solve.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.293 · 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

Citations13
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProduction & Manufacturing ResearchSame topicAdvanced Queuing Theory AnalysisFrench-language works237,207