A realistic multi-manned five-sided mixed-model assembly line balancing and scheduling problem with moving workers and limited workspace
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".