Activity Based Aggregate Job Costing Model for Reconfigurable Manufacturing Systems
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
Manufacturing continues to face escalated cost challenges as the global economy grows. In order to gain competitive advantage among its rivals, manufacturing firms are in a constant strive to lower their manufacturing costs compared to their competitors. This paper introduces a mathematical optimization model based on Activity Based Costing (ABC) method for Reconfigurable Manufacturing Systems (RMS) taking into consideration the bi- directional relationship between hourly rates and annual hours on each machine/workcentre. The output from the model will be the optimum hourly rates, decision on which jobs to accept or reject and decision on the financial feasibility of reconfiguration. Reconfiguration in this paper describes both system-level reconfiguration (investing in additional machining equipment) and/or, machine-level reconfiguration (extra module to an existing equipment). The model will be applied on a real life case study of a global Original Equipment Manufacturer of Machinery. The novelty of the proposed model is the incorporation of the bi-directional relationship between hourly rates and annual hours on each machine and provides a managerial decision making tool in terms of investment level required to pursue new business, and gaining competitive advantage over rivals.
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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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