MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2998380289 · doi:10.1016/j.ifacol.2019.11.339

Developing a bi-objective imperfect selective maintenance optimization model for multicomponent systems

2019· article· en· W2998380289 on OpenAlexaff
Claver Diallo, Abdelhakim Khatab, Uday Venkatadri

Bibliographic record

VenueIFAC-PapersOnLine · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReliability and Maintenance Optimization
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImperfectReliability (semiconductor)Component (thermodynamics)Reliability engineeringComputer scienceDecision makerPreferenceOptimal maintenanceOperations researchMaintenance actionsSystem optimizationMathematical optimizationEngineeringMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper develops a bi-objective imperfect selective maintenance optimization model for a multicomponent system, which carries out missions interspersed with scheduled breaks. Imperfect maintenance (IM) actions are performed on the components during the break to increase the system reliability during the following mission. The level of maintenance performed determines the improvement of the component’s health. A mathematical model with two objective functions is developed to optimize the tradeoffs between the total maintenance cost and the system reliability based on the decision maker’s preferences. Numerical examples are provided to show that the proposed model reaches valid maintenance decisions. Furthermore, it is shown that when high system reliability is required, the optimal decision is not significantly affected by the decision-maker’s preference for one objective or the other.

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)0.001
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations8
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIFAC-PapersOnLineSame topicReliability and Maintenance OptimizationFrench-language works237,207