MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3033721775 · doi:10.1109/tr.2020.2995277

State-Based Opportunistic Maintenance With Multifunctional Maintenance Windows

2020· article· en· W3033721775 on OpenAlexaff
Zihan Zhang, Li Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Reliability · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReliability and Maintenance Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersFok Ying Tung Education FoundationNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsReliability engineeringInitializationSpare partScheduling (production processes)Maintenance engineeringComputer scienceProbabilistic logicMaintenance actionsPreventive maintenanceInterval (graph theory)Software maintenanceCorrective maintenanceEngineeringReal-time computingOperations managementMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Industrial assets exposed to random environment often exhibit complex deterioration mechanisms with health status variations. In actual field operation, hidden defect signals are usually crucial indicators of upcoming malfunctions and also reminders of proactive maintenance executions. Despite the extensive applications of defect-centered maintenance, in the literature, little attempt has: a) captured the impact of random environments on health variation and restoration, and b) explored the differentiated functions of maintenance windows in separate states. This article addresses these challenges by introducing a state-based maintenance policy with multifunctional maintenance windows. The impact of environmental disturbance on both defect initialization and propagation is characterized by random increment of the state transition rate as well as probabilistic malfunction risk. Three types of maintenance windows (regular, opportunistic, and postponed) are scheduled to ensure a flexible scheduling of inspection and spare part resources. Importantly, the function of opportunistic window is state-based, defect identification when normal and removal when defective. The objective is to minimize the cost rate via the joint optimization of inspection interval, postponed interval, and opportunistic threshold. Experimental studies demonstrate the superior performance of this policy over some conventional policies.

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)0.002
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.183 · 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

Citations114
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on ReliabilitySame topicReliability and Maintenance OptimizationFrench-language works237,207