MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2810629198 · doi:10.5267/j.ijiec.2018.2.001

Trade-off in robustness, cost and performance by a multi-objective robust production optimization method

2018· article· en· W2810629198 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Industrial Engineering Computations · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicOptimal Experimental Design Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRobustness (evolution)Robust optimizationMathematical optimizationMulti-objective optimizationComputer scienceReliability engineeringProduction (economics)EngineeringEconomicsMathematicsMicroeconomicsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Designing a production process normally is involved with some important constraints such as uncertainty, trade-off between production costs and quality, customer's expectations and production tolerances. In this paper, a novel multi-objective robust optimization model is introduced to investigate the best levels of design variables. The primary objective is to minimize the production cost while increasing robustness and performance. The response surface methodology is utilized as a common approximation model to fit the relationship between responses and design variables in the worst-case scenario of uncertainties. The target mean ratio is applied to ensure the quality of the process by providing the robustness for all types of quality characteristics and with a trade-off between variability and deviance from the ideal point. The Lp metric method is used to integrate all objectives in one overall function. In order to estimate target value of the quality loss by considering production tolerances, the process capability ratio (

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.453
Threshold uncertainty score0.551

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.112
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.281 · 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