MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388543763 · doi:10.1109/tr.2023.3325665

An Availability-Constrained Integrated Maintenance–Monitoring Model for a System With Failures Following an NHPP

2023· article· en· W4388543763 on OpenAlexafffund
Fatemeh Safaei, Sharareh Taghipour

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Reliability · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReliability and Maintenance Optimization
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsReliability engineeringControl chartCorrective maintenancePreventive maintenanceControl limitsOptimal maintenanceProduction (economics)Maintenance actionsInterval (graph theory)ChartSensitivity (control systems)Maintenance engineeringStatistical process controlComputer scienceProcess (computing)Function (biology)Poisson distributionPlanned maintenanceEngineeringStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents an integrated model for production equipment maintenance and online process monitoring when the assignable causes and the equipment failures come from a nonhomogeneous Poisson process. To this end, six possible scenarios within a production cycle are described. These scenarios are defined based on equipment failures and control chart signals (true or false) within a production cycle and process condition at the end of cycle. Then, the occurrence probability and the expected time and cost of each scenario are calculated. The proposed model is characterized by five decision parameters, including number of inspections until planned maintenance, time interval between consecutive inspections, sample size, control limit coefficient, and optimal planned maintenance time. Moreover, the long-run expected cost rate is used as the objective function of the optimization problem, and two sets of constraints have been considered. The former set stands for statistical design of control chart, and the latter is related to equipment availability. Finally, a comprehensive numerical analysis is conducted to assess the sensitivity of the model and to compare the performance of the proposed integrated model to a stand-alone planned maintenance model. The results of the comparative study show that the integrated model outperforms the corresponding stand-alone planned maintenance model. The proposed policy is illustrated using a case study in a food 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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on ReliabilitySame topicReliability and Maintenance OptimizationFrench-language works237,207