Simulation-Based Study of the Resilience of Flexible Manufacturing Layouts Subject to Uncertain Demands of Product Variants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Due to market competition, manufacturers typically produce their products with different customized features, leading to the production of product variants (or a product family). Since the market trend can change swiftly, the demands of individual product variants can be difficult to predict. Two flexible manufacturing layouts are commonly considered: functional and cellular layouts. While the functional layout is more resilient to demand changes due to better resource pooling, the cellular layout can be more productive on some occasions due to better routing efficiency. In this context, the purpose of this paper is to quantify and study the criticality of product variants. The criticality score of a product variant can estimate and rank which product variants can sensitively cause bottlenecks in the functional and cellular layouts. The proposed criticality analysis starts with the estimation of bottleneck machines. Through the dependency information of machines and parts, we can estimate the criticality of product variants. The criticality analysis is demonstrated and examined through a simulation study with a study case involving the production of five furniture products with 16 unique parts using 11 machines. The simulation results show that the productions with more critical product variants tend to deteriorate the completion time of the cellular layout more severely. In practice, manufacturers can use the proposed criticality analysis to evaluate the criticality of product variants and support their facility layout decision. For example, if more demand for critical products is expected, the layout should support more resource pooling (e.g., functional layouts).
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".