MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3115806436 · doi:10.18280/jesa.530621

Influencing Factors and Evaluation Model of Quality Risks in Intelligent Manufacturing Mobile Supply Chain

2020· article· en· W3115806436 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yujie He

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal Européen des Systèmes Automatisés · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDigital Transformation in Industry
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSupply chainQuality (philosophy)Risk analysis (engineering)Computer scienceSupply chain risk managementKey (lock)Supply chain managementFuzzy logicBackpropagationIdentification (biology)Reliability engineeringArtificial neural networkEngineeringBusinessService managementComputer securityArtificial intelligenceMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The intelligent manufacturing (IM) supply chain (SC) involves multiple distributed agents. The mobile supply chain (MSC) technology supports the real-time management of key information resources in the supply chain of IM products. This paper explores the influencing factors and evaluation model of quality risks in IM MSC, trying to make realistic evaluation of the actual quality risks of the enterprise. Firstly, the authors constructed a quality risk identification framework for IM MSC, and a hierarchical evaluation index system (EIS) based on the factors affecting quality risks. Besides, the features and attributes of four dimensions of quality risks were specified, and the corresponding intuitive triangular fuzzy numbers were given. Next, an evaluation model was established for the quality risks of IM MSC based on backpropagation neural network (BPNN). After the evaluation of quality risks, a contract model was designed for the quality risk control in IM MSC. The proposed EIS and models were proved effective through experiments.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal Européen des Systèmes AutomatisésSame topicDigital Transformation in IndustryFrench-language works237,207