MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3155306123 · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-70566-4_63

Industry 4.0 and Decision Making

2021· book-chapter· en· W3155306123 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueLecture notes in mechanical engineering · 2021
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDigital Transformation in Industry
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlexibility (engineering)ProductivityAutonomyProduction (economics)Industry 4.0Context (archaeology)Lean manufacturingProcess (computing)Factory (object-oriented programming)Process managementKnowledge managementUnit (ring theory)Computer scienceBusinessOperations managementEngineeringEconomicsManagementPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Industry 4.0 is an ubiquitous term that suggests significant impacts on the productivity and flexibility of production systems. But to what extent do the various technologies associated with Industry 4.0 contribute to enhance autonomy of operational teams by helping them make better and faster decisions, particularly in the context of Lean production system? This paper proposes a model of different types of autonomy in the decision-making process, depending on whether or not the steps in the decision-making process are enhanced by technologies. This model will be tested afterwards in a use case implemented in a learning factory offering Lean management training before being tested in a real production unit.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity
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 score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.208 · 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