Scheduling of the optimal tool replacement times in a flexible manufacturing system
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
Abstract In Flexible Manufacturing Systems (FMSs). a cutting tool is frequently used for different operations and on different part types to minimize tool change-overs and the number of tools required, and to increase part-routing flexibility. In such situations, the tools become shared resources and work in job-dependent, changeable and nonhomogeneous conditions. It is well known that the tool failure rate depends on both age and machining conditions and that tool reliability is a function of the duration, machining conditions, and the sequence of the operations in FMS. The objective of this paper is to obtain a schedule of the optimal preventive replacement times for the cutting tools over a finite time horizon in a flexible manufacturing system. We assume that the tool will be replaced either upon failure during an operation or preventively after the completion of each operation, incurring different replacement costs. A standard stochastic dynamic programming approach is taken to obtain the optimal tool replacement times. The optimal schedule is obtained by minimizing the total expected cost over a finite time horizon for a given sequence of operations. A computational algorithm is developed and a numerical example is given to demonstrate the procedure.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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