Fabrication runtime decision for a hybrid system incorporating probabilistic breakdowns, scrap, and overtime
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Manufacturers today need to optimize their fabrication runtime decision by meeting short customer order due dates externally and managing the potentially unreliable machines and manufacturing processes internally. Outsourcing and overtime are commonly utilized strategies to expedite fabricating time. Additionally, detailed analyses and necessary actions on inevitable product defects (i.e., removal of scraps) and equipment breakdowns (such as machine repairing) are prerequisites to fabrication runtime planning. Motivated by assisting today’s manufacturers decide the best batch runtime plan under the situations mentioned above, this study applies mathematical modeling to a hybrid fabrication problem that incorporates partial overtime and outsourcing, inevitable product defects, and a Poisson-distributed breakdown. We develop a model to accurately represent the problem’s characteristics. Formulations and detailed model analyses allow us to find the cost function first. Differential equations and algorithms help us confirm the gain function’s convexity and find the best runtime decision. Lastly, we use numerical illustrations to show our study’s applicability by revealing in-depth crucial managerial information of the studied problem.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".