MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2887366348 · doi:10.1080/00207543.2018.1476786

A realistic multi-manned five-sided mixed-model assembly line balancing and scheduling problem with moving workers and limited workspace

2018· article· en· W2887366348 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Production Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAssembly Line Balancing Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersKharazmi UniversityCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAutomotive industryWorkspaceMathematical optimizationAssembly lineScheduling (production processes)Benders' decompositionLinear programmingInteger programmingComputer scienceJob shop schedulingLine (geometry)Industrial engineeringEngineeringMathematicsMechanical engineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The assembly line balancing problem can completely vary from one production line to the other. This paper deals with a realistic assembly line for the automotive industry inspired by Fiat Chrysler Automotive in North America and Parskhodro in Iran (both large-scale automotive companies). This problem includes some specific requirements that have not been studied in the literature. For example, the assembly line is five-sided, and workers can move along these sides. Due to the limited workspace, all the sides cannot work simultaneously at one station. First, a mixed integer linear programming model is proposed for the problem. Then, the model is improved to have a tighter linear relaxation. Moreover, an effective logic-based Benders’ decomposition algorithm is developed. After careful analysis of problem’s structure, three propositions are introduced. The master problem is well restricted by eight valid inequalities. Two different sub-problem types are defined to extract more information from the master problem’s solution. In this case, the algorithm adds effective cuts that reduce the solution space to the extent possible at each iteration. Thus, the number of iterations is significantly cut down. The performance of the model and algorithm, as well as improvement made on both, is evaluated.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.108
Threshold uncertainty score0.545

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.297 · 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