MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4244645511 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14661135.v1

Minimizing makespan of a flexible machine under tooling contraints

2021· preprint· en· W4244645511 on OpenAlexaff
M. L. Kabir

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicScheduling and Optimization Algorithms
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJob shop schedulingMachiningMachine toolFlexibility (engineering)Flexible manufacturing systemScheduling (production processes)Computer scienceProcess (computing)Set (abstract data type)Point (geometry)Job shopSequence (biology)Industrial engineeringEngineering drawingMathematical optimizationEngineeringFlow shop schedulingMechanical engineeringMathematicsEmbedded system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Computer Number Control (CNC) milling and lathe machines are widely used in manufacturing due to their flexibility in producing parts with a wide variety of geometries. Each flexible machine has a tool magazine capable of holding a set of tools. As machining requirements for each job change, tools can be removed and different ones can be inserted so that the next job can be processed. The existing literature on the job scheduling and the tool loading can be divided into four main areas. The first area is the tool loading for a pre-specified job sequence where the objective is to determine the optimal tool loading by minimizing the number of tool switching. In addition to tool loading, the second area also focuses on sequencing the jobs too; however, the objective is the same as the first one. Rather than to minimizing the number to tool switching, the focal point of the third area has been shifted to minimizing the makespan in presence of multiple process plans. However, the main assumption is that the magazine can hold all tools needed to process all jobs and tool switching is not required. The fourth area considers the geometric and mechanical properties of the tool, assuming a tool switching may be required due to tool life. The job scheduling and the tool loading literatures do not consider multiple process plans or tool life into their problem. Therefore, the first part of this thesis provides a Dynamic Programming method to determine the optimal makespan for a pre-specified sequence of jobs, assuming tool switching may required due to multiple process plans, the capacity of the tool magazine and due to the tool life. In the second part, the assumption for fixed job sequence is relaxed and a heuristic approach is used to first sequence the jobs and then Dynamic Programming is applied to find the optimal makespan for that particular job sequence.

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 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)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.606
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicScheduling and Optimization AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207