MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4377966757 · doi:10.46254/na07.20220060

Modelling Congestion for Aggregate Production Planning in Open Queuing Networks

2023· article· en· W4377966757 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicScheduling and Optimization Algorithms
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQueueing theoryComputer scienceAggregate (composite)Aggregate planningNetwork congestionComputer networkProduction (economics)Production planningMicroeconomicsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The challenge in aggregate production planning for high-tech manufacturing industries such as aerospace, semiconductor manufacturing, or high precision components production is the variability in cycle times or cycle steps due to the rework required to meet very high levels (6-sigma) of quality.This variability at the lower planning level needs to be accounted for in aggregate planning level.Planning circularity, whereby cycle time depends on resource utilization while resource utilization is determined by cycle time continues to be an important problem in the aggregate planning literature.It is well known that ignoring congestion, as is the case in MRP-II based systems still widely in use, is inaccurate.In the presence of congestion, the relationship of WIP and throughput is nonlinear and bottleneck resources may shift constantly.The most common approach of addressing the nonlinear relationship between the WIP and the throughput is through the clearing function.Recent work by Omar et al. (2017) proposed a mixed-integer linear model for closed queuing production networks using fixed release planning.The challenge with this model is that it is difficult to scale up for typically sized problems scalability.This work extends the approach in Omar et al.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicScheduling and Optimization AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207