MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382068718 · doi:10.4236/ti.2023.143008

Review of Disruptive Technology in Automotive Manufactruring

2023· article· en· W4382068718 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Patrick Osakuade

Bibliographic record

VenueTechnology and Investment · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDigital Transformation in Industry
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutomotive industryManufacturing engineeringBusinessIndustrial organizationProcess (computing)RevenueAutomationComputer scienceEngineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A study has been carried out on one of the first generation automotive assembly plant in Nigeria on their current level of assembly operations, automation and how to migrate to the industry 4.0. In the process, a comprehensive review of disruptive technology in the automotive manufacturing sector was carried out to find out the level of disruptive technology in the global automotive manufacturing industries. It was discovered that the industry 4.0 technology is already fully operational in the key global automotive manufacturing and assembly plants. This has positively impacted the automotive manufacturing industries and it comes with many benefits like employability, technology advancement, increases in revenue to the industry, and decarburization of the environment. The research has shown that with the knowledge of maturity model for the adoption of industry 4.0 in the manufacturing process, the organization could determine their industry 4.0 level at every point in time and the adoption could begin from a section in the organization before expanding to other sections, units or department. There is a need for the Nigeria automotive industries to start to migrate to the industry 4.0 level from either the body welding operation or the paint shop.

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 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)0.000
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.298
Threshold uncertainty score0.375

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTechnology and InvestmentSame topicDigital Transformation in IndustryFrench-language works237,207