MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408256292 · doi:10.5267/j.dsl.2025.1.001

A new mathematical model for cellular manufacturing system with productivity consideration

2025· article· en· W4408256292 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hatice Ediz Atmaca, Hatice Erdoğan Akbulut, Esra Aktaş

Bibliographic record

VenueDecision Science Letters · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Manufacturing and Logistics Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProductivityCellular manufacturingComputer scienceManufacturing engineeringMathematical modelEngineeringIndustrial engineeringManagement scienceBiochemical engineeringSystems engineeringMathematicsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In today’s environment of escalating competition, companies are adapting their management and production strategies, and product diversity is rapidly increasing. Companies require cellular manufacturing systems to produce products with high diversity in a short amount of time, ensuring the desired quality and meeting customer expectations. Cellular manufacturing systems, which have a more flexible structure compared to traditional production systems, are a good and effective solution for managers. Cellular manufacturing is an approach that aims to produce products with varying diversity in the shortest possible time and at the lowest cost, targeting an increase in efficiency. In this study, a cell manufacturing system proposal is made and cell formation is carried out to increase efficiency and effectiveness in a company that manufactures industrial refrigeration cabinets. A productivity-based 0-1 integer mathematical programming model is prepared that facilitates the simultaneous grouping of part and machine families in cell formation. In addition to the intracellular and intercellular transportation costs found in productivity-based models in the literature, labor costs, maintenance costs, the depreciation costs of the machines used in the cells, and the waiting costs of the machines are also added to the prepared model. The model is solved with the help of the GAMS 23.5.1 software package, creating part families and machine groups. Group efficiency values are measured, and the current and proposed situations are compared.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.244
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDecision Science LettersSame topicAdvanced Manufacturing and Logistics OptimizationFrench-language works237,207