MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4280561258 · doi:10.1142/s0219622022500171

A Hybrid Data-Driven Approach for Forecasting the Characteristics of Production Disruptions and Interruptions

2022· article· en· W4280561258 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mohammad Reza Bazargan-Lari, Sharareh Taghipour

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicScheduling and Optimization Algorithms
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDowntimeProduction (economics)Automotive industryComputer scienceRange (aeronautics)Scheduling (production processes)Reliability engineeringIndustrial engineeringOperations researchEngineeringOperations managementEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Manufacturing companies sometimes suffer from unexpected production disruptions/interruptions events (DIEs), affecting the production performance and cost. Since DIEs vary in type and cause, predicting the characteristics of their corresponding production downtimes is a challenging task. Although efforts have been devoted to forecast/prevent specific types of DIEs, such as machine-related events, it is still difficult to deal with the uncertainty caused by a combination of production DIEs of various types. Moreover, the absence of a realistic scenario generator incorporating DIEs has been a challenge in production scheduling under uncertainty. This study investigates the potential use of a hybrid data-driven approach in incorporating the uncertainties of a wide range of DIEs. In this approach, a random forest (RF) method and probability distributions are integrated to forecast the DIEs. The study was carried out based on the recorded DIEs in a Canadian company producing assembly parts for automotive industry. The performance of the proposed methodology for forecasting the production DIEs is evaluated by determining the predicted total downtime (TD) in percent of the expected processing time. The proposed hybrid model yields an overall accuracy of 92.82% in predicting the TD, compared to an overall accuracy of 75.64% when a single RF is used for prediction.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.257 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Information Technology & Decision MakingSame topicScheduling and Optimization AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207