MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408773534 · doi:10.1080/17509653.2025.2475774

Hybrid MTS/MTO production scheduling with cloud orders: a mathematical model based on an empirical study

2025· article· en· W4408773534 on OpenAlexaff
Amirhossein Sharifisari, Erfan Shahab, Omid Fatahi Valilai

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Management Science and Engineering Management · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicScheduling and Optimization Algorithms
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceCloud computingScheduling (production processes)Empirical researchProduction (economics)Mathematical optimizationOperations researchMathematicsOperating systemMicroeconomicsStatisticsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Integrated optimization for production systems plays a vital role in today’s competitive economy because it has always attracted valuable and realistic classes of production problems. So that it has recently been the focus of dominant research studies in the field of Production and Operations Management (POM). In this research, a cloud-based order collection model has initially been presented which works in parallel with the regular order system. Moreover, the predictive maintenance (PdM) is improved more by the preventive strategy. Finally, an Order Acceptance and Scheduling (OAS) model, which uses the hybrid Make to Stock/Order (MTS/MTO) production strategy, is presented as the core of an empirical company’s decision-making and planning. In this model, regular orders and cloud-based orders are produced by MTS and MTO strategies, respectively. The model formulation is a MILP, and its objective function maximizes profit. The model is solved using the exact solution method with CPLEX Solver. Computational results for improving productivity in the company studied after conducting this research are presented compared to its previous statufs. This research proposes a novel insight into the OAS problem through a practical approach and offers a new opportunity to include the cloud and regular order fulfilment integration.

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)0.002
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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Management Science and Engineering ManagementSame topicScheduling and Optimization AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207