MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413885312 · doi:10.3390/electronics14173499

Optimizing Robotic Disassembly-Assembly Line Balancing with Directional Switching Time via an Improved Q(λ) Algorithm in IoT-Enabled Smart Manufacturing

2025· article· en· W4413885312 on OpenAlexaff
Qi Zhang, Yang Xing, Man Yao, Xiwang Guo, Shujin Qin, Haibin Zhu, Liang Qi, Bin Hu

Bibliographic record

VenueElectronics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAssembly Line Balancing Optimization
Canadian institutionsNipissing University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInternet of ThingsAssembly lineComputer scienceLine (geometry)AlgorithmEngineeringEmbedded systemMechanical engineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the growing adoption of circular economy principles in manufacturing, efficient disassembly and reassembly of end-of-life (EOL) products has become a key challenge in smart factories. This paper addresses the Disassembly and Assembly Line Balancing Problem (DALBP), which involves scheduling robotic tasks across workstations while minimizing total operation time and accounting for directional switching time between disassembly and assembly phases. To solve this problem, we propose an improved reinforcement learning algorithm, IQ(λ), which extends the classical Q(λ) method by incorporating eligibility trace decay, a dynamic Action Table mechanism to handle non-conflicting parallel tasks, and switching-aware reward shaping to penalize inefficient task transitions. Compared with standard Q(λ), these modifications enhance the algorithm’s global search capability, accelerate convergence, and improve solution quality in complex DALBP scenarios. While the current implementation does not deploy live IoT infrastructure, the architecture is modular and designed to support future extensions involving edge-cloud coordination, trust-aware optimization, and privacy-preserving learning in Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT) environments. Four real-world disassembly-assembly cases (flashlight, copier, battery, and hammer drill) are used to evaluate the algorithm’s effectiveness. Experimental results show that IQ(λ) consistently outperforms traditional Q-learning, Q(λ), and Sarsa in terms of solution quality, convergence speed, and robustness. Furthermore, ablation studies and sensitivity analysis confirm the importance of the algorithm’s core design components. This work provides a scalable and extensible framework for intelligent scheduling in cyber-physical manufacturing systems and lays a foundation for future integration with secure, IoT-connected 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 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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueElectronicsSame topicAssembly Line Balancing OptimizationFrench-language works237,207