Factors Influencing Cycle Times in Offsite Construction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In offsite construction, various factors contribute to variability in cycle times at workstations in production facilities, leading to imbalanced production lines.Understanding these factors is vital for implementing Heijunka, a fundamental lean principle that consists of levelling out the work schedule.This study presents a qualitative approach for identifying and understanding factors that influence variable cycle times at the workstation level.The application of the approach is demonstrated in reference to a semi-automated framing workstation in a panelised construction facility.A list of 36 potential influencing factors categorised into eight classes is first compiled based on observation of the process, a cross-functional diagram, and a review of relevant studies, and then discussed based on feedback solicited from personnel at the case framing station through a semi-structured interview.The approach, its application, and the results demonstrate the effect of expending effort on the identification and understanding of cycle time-influencing factors in improving the accuracy of cycle time analysis, thereby facilitating the implementation of Heijunka.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".