IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/cejnor/v27y2019i2d10.1007_s10100-018-0578-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Test-sequence optimisation by survival analysis

Author

Listed:
  • János Baumgartner

    (University of Pannonia)

  • Zoltán Süle

    (University of Pannonia)

  • Botond Bertók

    (University of Pannonia)

  • János Abonyi

    (University of Pannonia)

Abstract

Testing is an indispensable process for ensuring product quality in production systems. Reducing the time and cost spent on testing whilst minimising the risk of not detecting faults is an essential problem of process engineering. The optimisation of complex testing processes consisting of independent test steps is considered. Survival analysis-based models of an elementary test to efficiently combine the time-dependent outcome of the tests and costs related to the operation of the testing system were developed. A mixed integer non-linear programming (MINLP) model to formalize how the total cost of testing depends on the sequence and the parameters of the elementary test steps was proposed. To provide an efficient formalization of the scheduling problem and avoid difficulties due to the relaxation of the integer variables, the MINLP model as a P-graph representation-based process network synthesis problem was considered. The applicability of the methodology is demonstrated by a realistic case study taken from the computer manufacturing industry. With the application of the optimal test times and sequence provided by the SCIP (Solving Constraint Integer Programs) solver, 0.1–5% of the cost of the testing can be saved.

Suggested Citation

  • János Baumgartner & Zoltán Süle & Botond Bertók & János Abonyi, 2019. "Test-sequence optimisation by survival analysis," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 27(2), pages 357-375, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:cejnor:v:27:y:2019:i:2:d:10.1007_s10100-018-0578-z
    DOI: 10.1007/s10100-018-0578-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10100-018-0578-z
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10100-018-0578-z?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Timothy J. Sturgeon, 2002. "Modular production networks: a new American model of industrial organization," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 11(3), pages 451-496, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jan Fagerberg & Bengt-Åke Lundvall & Martin Srholec, 2018. "Global Value Chains, National Innovation Systems and Economic Development," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 30(3), pages 533-556, July.
    2. Baldwin, Carliss Y. & Bogers, Marcel L.A.M. & Kapoor, Rahul & West, Joel, 2024. "Focusing the ecosystem lens on innovation studies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(3).
    3. Davide Consoli & Pier Paolo Patrucco, 2011. "Complexity and the Coordination of Technological Knowledge: The Case of Innovation Platforms," Chapters, in: Handbook on the Economic Complexity of Technological Change, chapter 8 Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. Vincent FRIGANT, 2009. "Is the automotive supply chain compatible with Corporate Social Responsible practices? (In French)," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2009-08, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).
    5. Carlino, Gerald & Kerr, William R., 2015. "Agglomeration and Innovation," Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, in: Gilles Duranton & J. V. Henderson & William C. Strange (ed.), Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, edition 1, volume 5, chapter 0, pages 349-404, Elsevier.
    6. Susanne Meyer & Javier Revilla Diez, 2015. "One country, two systems: How regional institutions shape governance modes in the greater Pearl River Delta, China," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 94(4), pages 891-900, November.
    7. Susan Helper & Mari Sako, 2010. "Management innovation in supply chain: appreciating Chandler in the twenty-first century," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 19(2), pages 399-429, April.
    8. Emanuela Todeva & Ruslan Rakhmatullin, 2016. "Industry Global Value Chains, Connectivity and Regional Smart Specialisation in Europe. An Overview of Theoretical Approaches and Mapping Methodologies," JRC Research Reports JRC102801, Joint Research Centre.
    9. Emanuele Bacchiocchi & Massimo Florio & Anna Giunta, 2012. "Internationalisation and the agglomeration effect in the global value chain: the case of Italian automotive suppliers," International Journal of Technological Learning, Innovation and Development, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 5(3), pages 267-290.
    10. Jean-Luc Gaffard, 2003. "Coordination, marché et organisation. Essai sur l'efficacité et la stabilité des économies de marché," Revue de l'OFCE, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 85(2), pages 235-270.
    11. Enrico Teich & Thorsten Claus, 2017. "Measurement of Load and Capacity Flexibility in Manufacturing," Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, Springer;Global Institute of Flexible Systems Management, vol. 18(4), pages 291-302, December.
    12. Rachel Ann Mulhall & John R. Bryson, 2013. "The Energy Hot Potato and Governance of Value Chains: Power, Risk, and Organizational Adjustment in Intermediate Manufacturing Firms," Economic Geography, Clark University, vol. 89(4), pages 395-419, October.
    13. Anna Giunta & Domenico Scalera & Francesco Trivieri & Jeffrey B. Nugent & Mariarosaria Agostino, 2011. "Firm Productivity, Organizational Choice and Global Value Chain," Working Papers 2011R09, Orkestra - Basque Institute of Competitiveness.
    14. Vincent FRIGANT & Stéphanie PERES & Stéphane VIROL, 2012. "How do SMEs to rise at the top of the supply chain? An econometric exploration of the French auto industry (In French)," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2012-16, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).
    15. Van Assche, Ari, 2008. "Modularity and the organization of international production," Japan and the World Economy, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 353-368, August.
    16. Fukuda, Kayano, 2020. "Science, technology and innovation ecosystem transformation toward society 5.0," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 220(C).
    17. D’Ippolito, Beatrice & Miozzo, Marcela & Consoli, Davide, 2014. "Knowledge systematisation, reconfiguration and the organisation of firms and industry: The case of design," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(8), pages 1334-1352.
    18. Christina Stringer & Steve Hughes & D Hugh Whittaker & Nigel Haworth & Glenn Simmons, 2016. "Labour standards and regulation in global value chains: The case of the New Zealand Fishing Industry," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 48(10), pages 1910-1927, October.
    19. Saon Ray & Smita Miglani, 2018. "Upgrading in the Indian automobile sector: The role of lead firms," Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations (ICRIER) Working Paper 360, Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations (ICRIER), New Delhi, India.
    20. Stefano Brusoni & Luigi Marengo & Andrea Prencipe & Marco Valente, 2004. "The Value and Costs of Modularity: A Cognitive Perspective," SPRU Working Paper Series 123, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:cejnor:v:27:y:2019:i:2:d:10.1007_s10100-018-0578-z. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.