Buffer allocation, equipment selection and line balancing optimisation in unreliable production lines
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents an integrated optimisation model to simultaneously solve buffer allocation, equipment selection and line balancing problems in unreliable production line systems. The considered unreliable serial production line consists of m workstations and m − 1 intermediate buffers. The objective is to maximise the system throughput level. A decomposition method is used to estimate the production line throughput. The decision variables in the formulated optimal design problem are buffer levels, types of equipment and the sets of tasks assigned to the workstations. An efficient algorithm, based on the nonlinear threshold accepting algorithm (NLTA) is proposed to solve this problem. The efficiency of the proposed approach is compared to existing algorithms and first tested on a simple assembly line balancing type-2 problem (SALB-2). Here the objective is to minimise the cycle time with a fixed number of workstations. In the second numerical experiment, the integrated model is solved using the NLTA, and its performance is compared to that of the great deluge algorithm (GDA) through several numerical examples. [Received: 9 June 2018; Revised: 15 September 2018; Revised: 18 April 2019; Accepted: 2 August 2019]
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it