Engineering Management and Modular Design: A Path to Robust Manufacturing Processes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Manufacturing environments, characterized by rapid, unpredictable changes, uncertainties, risks, and uncontrollable fluctuations, pose significant challenges to minimizing disruptions in processes. This study introduces an innovative approach that prioritizes curbing risk propagation among processes to enhance robustness. It emphasizes the integration of engineering management principles and modular design within manufacturing. Adopting a system engineering perspective, all manufacturing process activities are viewed as interrelated components within a unified system. By employing Axiomatic Design (AD) theory and the Design Structure Matrix (DSM) method, manufacturing process architecture is modularized, yielding heightened robustness. The proposed mathematical model equips engineering and manufacturing managers with a potent tool for designing robust processes while adeptly managing system complexity. The study's outcomes underscore a substantial enhancement in modularization, leading to elevated overall robustness in manufacturing processes. To validate the methodology, the architectural design of manufacturing processes is examined in a real-case scenario, specifically the Barez Industrial Group in Iran. This verification substantiates the 'manufacturing processes' of the case, presenting an optimally modularized architecture. The results affirm the proposed approach's efficacy, demonstrating improved modularization that contributes to bolstered robustness in manufacturing processes.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".