A Computer Simulation Approach to Improving Tugboat Shipbuilding Design and Development Productivity
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
Tugboat shipbuilding design drawings are currently prepared with insufficient and untimely information of material/equipment availability, resulting in drawing changes and errors, increased labor and material costs, and lengthening of ship completion time. It is proposed that the design drawings are only prepared after confirmation of material/equipment availability from vendors to deal with the problem. The concept of concurrent engineering is introduced by integrating design and vendor activities through adequate and timely vendor-furnished information (VFI) to deal with the problem. The PERT (program evaluation and review technique) computer simulation models were employed through the use of a simulation package AweSim to analyze the work activity networks of piping drawings. A cost savings of about $1,389,700 would be possible through a 10% reduction in total design and including piping drawings and development labor costs and construction labor and material costs. The completion time for preparing design drawings and ship construction can be reduced by about 186 days or 19.5% of the total throughput time for a tugboat shipbuilding process.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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