MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307865591 · doi:10.5267/j.jpm.2022.8.002

An ordered precedence constrained flow shop scheduling problem with machine specific preventive maintenance

2022· article· en· W4307865591 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Project Management · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicScheduling and Optimization Algorithms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreventive maintenanceTardinessFlow shop schedulingInterruptComputer scienceScheduling (production processes)Job shop schedulingScheduleOperations researchReliability engineeringMathematical optimizationEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In reality, the machines may interrupt because of the nature of deterioration of the machines. Thus, it is inevitable to perform maintenance alongside production planning. The preventive maintenance is a schedule of strategic operations that are performed prior to the failure occurring, to retain the system operating at the preferred level of consistency. Thus, preventive maintenance plays a significant role in flow shop scheduling models. With its practical significance, this study addresses a practical three-machine n jobs flow shop-scheduling problem (FSSP) in which machine specific preventive maintenance, where each machine is given with a maintenance schedule is considered. In addition, a practical ordered precedence constraint in which some set of jobs has to process in the specified order irrespective of their processing times is also considered. The problem’s goal is to establish the optimal job sequence and preventive maintenance such that the overall cost of tardiness and preventive maintenance is as minimum as possible. An efficient heuristic approach is designed to tackle the present model, resulting in total cost savings. A comparative analysis is not conducted due to absence of studies on the current problem in the literature. However, Computational experiments are carried out on some test instances and results are reported. The reported results may be useful for future studies.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.278
Threshold uncertainty score0.622

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.221 · 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