Capacity Constraint Analysis Using Object Detection for Smart Manufacturing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The increasing adoption of Deep Learning (DL)-based Object Detection (OD) models in smart manufacturing has opened up new avenues for optimizing production processes. Traditional industries facing capacity constraints require noninvasive methods for in-depth operations analysis to optimize processes and increase revenue. In this study, we propose a novel framework for capacity constraint analysis that identifies bottlenecks in production facilities and conducts cycle time studies using an end-to-end pipeline. This pipeline employs a Convolutional Neural Network (CNN)-based OD model to accurately identify potential objects on the production floor, followed by a CNN-based tracker to monitor their lifecycle in each workstation. The extracted metadata are further processed through the proposed framework. Our analysis of a real-world manufacturing facility over six months revealed that the bottleneck station operated at only 73.1% productivity, falling to less than 40% on certain days; additionally, the processing time of each item increased by 53% during certain weeks due to critical labor and materials shortages. These findings highlight significant opportunities for process optimization and efficiency improvements. The proposed pipeline can be extended to other production facilities where manual labor is used to assemble parts, and can be used to analyze and manage labor and materials over time as well as to conduct audits and improve overall yields, potentially transforming capacity management in smart manufacturing environments.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".