An efficient production planning approach based demand driven MRP under resource constraints
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Production plans based on Material Requirement Planning (MRP) frequently fall short in reflecting actual customer demand and coping with demand fluctuations, mainly due to the rising complexity of the production environment and the challenge of making precise predictions. At the same time, MRP is deficient in effective adjustment strategies and has inadequate operability in plan optimization. To address material management challenges in a volatile supply-demand environment, this paper creates a make-to-stock (MTS) material production planning model that is based on customer demand and the demand-driven production planning and control framework. The objective of the model is to optimize material planning output under resource constraints (capacity and storage space constraints) to meet the fluctuating demand of customers. To solve constrained optimization problems, the demand-driven material requirements planning (DDMRP) management concept is integrated with the grey wolf optimization (GWO) algorithm and proposed the DDMRP-GWO algorithm. The proposed DDMRP-GWO algorithm is used to optimize the inventory levels, shortage rates, and production line capacity utilization simultaneously. To validate the effectiveness of the proposed approach, two sets of customer demand data with different levels of volatility are used in experiments. The results demonstrate that the DDMRP-GWO algorithm can optimize the production capacity allocation of different types of parts under the resource constraints, enhance the material supply level, reduce the shortage rate, and maintain a stable production process.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".