MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3204456567 · doi:10.3991/ijoe.v4i2.451

Discrete Event Simulation: State of the Art

2007· article· en· W3204456567 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

VenueInternational Journal of Online and Biomedical Engineering (iJOE) · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicSimulation Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsBecton Dickinson (Canada)
FundersFairleigh Dickinson University
KeywordsDiscrete event simulationState (computer science)Event (particle physics)Computer scienceAlgorithmSimulationPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Discrete event simulation technologies have been extensively used by industry and academia to deal with various industrial problems. By late 1990s, the discrete event simulation was in doldrums as global manufacturing industries went through radical changes. The simulation software industry also went through consolidation. The changes have created new problems, challenges and opportunities to the discrete event simulation. This paper reviews the discrete event simulation technologies; discusses challenges and opportunities presented by both global manufacturing and the knowledge economy. The authors believe that discrete event simulation remains one of the most effective decision support tools but much need to be done in order to address new challenges. To this end, the paper calls for development of a new generation of discrete event simulation software.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.706
Threshold uncertainty score0.159

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.378 · 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