MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7005399356

A PRACTICAL SCHEDULING APPROACH FOR THE STEEL-MAKING PROCESS

2023· dissertation· en· W7005399356 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMacSphere (McMaster University) · 2023
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicIchthyology and Marine Biology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMcMaster University
KeywordsScheduling (production processes)Fair-share schedulingDynamic priority schedulingTwo-level schedulingGenetic algorithm schedulingRate-monotonic schedulingRound-robin scheduling
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis presents a review of optimal production scheduling in the steel industry. Steel production encompasses various processes, such as the ‘’Blast Furnace’’ and ‘’Hot-Rolled Steel Sheets Mill’’. However, this thesis specifically focuses on the steel making process due to its intermediate nature and substantial influence on profits and costs. \\\\This paper presents a MILP scheduling method to tackle practical steel scheduling problems. The scheduling of steel process poses a significant challenge due to complicated constraints and machine rules, making it a time-consuming task to obtain an optimal solution. To address this problem, a strategy has been proposed to break down the huge and complex problem into smaller sub-problems. The foundational concept behind this approach was initially introduced by Harjunkoski and Grossmann (2001). However, further improvements are proposed in this thesis by introducing a more flexible model for process and grading selections, tailored to practical steel scheduling problems. The thesis presents a strategy to obtain optimal steel making process scheduling by using a MILP approach. In addition, this thesis shows an optimal steel making process scheduling under processing time uncertainty. Uncertain processing time can have great impact the schedule accuracy. To tackle with this problem, a stochastic scheduling model is represented. Moreover, this thesis illustrates an improvement to generate a practical scheduling of steel making process by making use of real processing time data. To validate the effectiveness of our proposed methods, we provide a small example for each step of the scheduling process. The results demonstrate that our approach yields reasonable scheduling solutions.

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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMacSphere (McMaster University)→Same topicIchthyology and Marine Biology→French-language works237,207→