3 tayangan

Diunggah oleh Vaibhav Chaudhary

2007_Alamri, Balkhi_International Journal of Production Economics_The Effects of Learning and Forgetting on the Optimal Production Lot s

- Article 3_Joint Optimal Inventory Control and Preventive Maintenance Policy
- Financial Viability of Advancing Payment for Contract Growers of Groundnut Seed
- mbb-bok.pdf
- SSRN-id2187229
- 22Chapter14 (1)
- Vol No Paper 6
- PM & IR Syllabus
- Machine Learning Observations
- YMS Ch4: More on Two-Variable Data AP Statistics at LSHS Mr. Molesky
- Depth vs Breath
- Current and Probable Past Wildlife Fatality Hotspots on the Thousand Islands Parkway, Ontario, Canada
- Multiple Response Surface Methods
- Syllabus StatInfKI
- Lecture 01
- MoD Thesis
- Common pitfalls in statistical analysis: Linear regression analysis
- EMTSession4Forecasting.ppt
- Cervical Cancer Vaccine - Eco No Metrics Project
- [John H. Aldrich, Forrest D. Nelson] Linear Probab(BookZZ.org)
- Chapter 7 - Multiple Regression

Anda di halaman 1dari 14

www.elsevier.com/locate/ijpe

lot size for deteriorating items with time varying demand and

deterioration rates

Adel. A. Alamri, Zaid T. Balkhi

Department of Statistics and Operations Research, King Saud University, P.O. Box 2455, Riyadh 11451, Saudi Arabia

Received 29 April 2004; accepted 9 August 2006

Available online 20 October 2006

Abstract

In this paper, we shall study the effects of learning and forgetting on the production lot size problems for an innite

planning horizon. Items deteriorate while they are in storage, and both demand and deterioration rates are arbitrary

functions of time. The instantaneous production rate presented herein is dependent on the time required to produce the

rst unit at the beginning of production process, the number of units remembered, and the xed learning slope component.

The forgetting slope is represented by an approximation of the minimum break to which the manufacturer assumes total

forgetting so that it allows variable total forgetting breaks. The system is subject to learning in the production stage and to

forgetting while production ceased so that the optimal manufactured quantity for any given cycle is dependent on the

instantaneous production rate. A closed form for the total relevant costs is derived, and rigorous mathematical methods

that guide to a minimum total cost of the underlying inventory system are introduced. Illustrative examples, which explain

the applications of the theoretical results as well as their numerical verications, are also given.

r 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Learning; Forgetting; Variant time to total forgetting; Instantaneous production rate; Varying demand; Deterioration;

Optimality

ment efciency (Jaber and Bonney, 1999). These

It is often the case that the performance of a factors can be reected on the manufacturing

system engaged in repetitive manufacturing opera- system as a reduction in cost and/or time of

tions improves with time. This is due to the learning production. The Learning Phenomenon intro-

phenomenon, which is a decrease in the cost and/or duced by Wright (Wright, 1936) to study factors

the time required to produce each successive unit. affecting the cost of airplanes, which was the rst

Factors usually inherent to this improvement may attempt to link the performance of a specic task to

include the more effective use of tools and the number of times that task is repeated, resulted in

machines, increased familiarity with operational the theory of the learning curve. Wrights power

function formulation is expressed as

Corresponding author.

E-mail addresses: adel_nlp@msn.com (A.A. Alamri),

ztbalkhi@ksu.edu.sa (Z.T. Balkhi). tn t1 nr , (1)

0925-5273/$ - see front matter r 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2006.08.004

ARTICLE IN PRESS

126 A.A. Alamri, Z.T. Balkhi / Int. J. Production Economics 107 (2007) 125138

where tn is the time required to produce the nth unit, model are treated in Section 5. Illustrative examples,

t1 is the time required to produce the rst unit, n is which explain the applications of the theoretical

the production count, and r is the slope of the results of Section 5 as well as their numerical

learning curve, computed as r log l/log 2 where verications are given in Section 6, while concluding

l is the learning rate. The learning curve introduced remarks are provided in Section 7. The paper closes

by Wright (1936) is a common used model, because, with an Appendix where we provide an approxima-

it has a simple and applicable mathematical form. tion of the forgetting slope.

However, it implies a decrease in the cumulative

time per unit as the quantity produced approaches 2. Review of past contributions

to n. That is, for r40 then tn ! 0 as n ! 1, which

implies that the time required to produce the nth Learning and forgetting phenomena have

unit can be neglected as n takes on relatively large received the attention of many researchers (Adler

values. This, in fact, is unreasonable conclusion, and Nanda, 1974; Balkhi, 2003; Carlson, 1975;

since in real-world problems, it is often that, after a Carlson and Rowe, 1976; Elmaghraby, 1990;

certain time of cumulative learning in a production Globerson et al., 1989; Hancock, 1967; Hoffman,

system, the system reaches a steady-state situation, 1968; Keachie and Fontana, 1966; Muth and

in which case tn will approach an almost certain Spermann, 1983; Spradlin and Pierce, 1967;

value, where then tn tmin 40. On the other hand, a Steedman, 1970; Sule, 1978; Wortham and Mayyasi,

break in production will have an adverse effect on 1972; Wright, 1936). Salamah et al. (1993) presented

tn. For example, it is reasonable to assume that if a a modied production lot-sizing inventory model

large amount of time has elapsed between con- that incorporates the effect of full transmission of

secutive production runs then we would not follow learning, which may be achieved during production

the same learning curve at the point where produc- period. They treated the innite horizon case, where

tion resumes. The production rate at the recom- production rate is not signicantly higher than the

mencement of production might not be as high as demand rate, in which inventory level during

when the production ceased. Hence, the cost and/or production period rises in an increasingly nonlinear

the time needed to produce the rst unit in the next rate. Jaber and Bonney (1996) extended the work of

production run will increase as the length of the Salamah et al. (1993) by developing a mathematical

break increases. This loss of performance over the model that describes the learningforgetting rela-

production break is due to the forgetting phenom- tionship, referred to as the learnforget curve model

enon. Carlson and Rowe (1976) described the (LFCM). The LFCM was tested and shown to be

forgetting or interruption portion of the learning consistent with the model presented by Globerson et

cycle by a negative decay function equivalent to the al. (1989) with less than 1% deviation. With the

decay observed in electrical losses in condensers. LFCM, it is possible to determine the value of the

The forgetting curve relation presented by Carlson forgetting rate once its mathematical form is

and Rowe (1976), is expressed as assumed. Jaber and Bonney (1996) assumed that

the forgetting slope is dependent on three factors.

t^m t^1 ml , (2)

These factors are the equivalent accumulated output

where t^m is the equivalent time for the mth unit of of continuous production at the point of interrup-

lost experience of the forgetting curve, m is the tion, the minimum break to which the manufacturer

amount of units that would have been produced if assumes total forgetting, and the learning slope.

interruption did not occur, t^1 is the intercept of the They showed that forgetting had an adverse effect

forgetting curve, and l is the slope of the forgetting because of the drop in labor productivity. Jaber and

curve reecting the increase in the production time Bonney (1998) developed three models for the

required per unit. The remainder of this paper is innite and nite planning horizon. They showed

organized as follows. In the next section, we review that when the system experiences a partial transmis-

relevant literature. In Section 3, we formulate the sion of learning the optimal policy was to carry

general model without the consideration of learning fewer inventories in later lots. Jaber and Bonney

and forgetting effects. The learnforgetlearn rela- (1997) studied the effect of learning and forgetting

tionship is introduced in Section 4. Reformulation on the optimal manufactured quantity with the

of the general model under learnforgetlearn consideration of intracycle, within cycle, backor-

effects and solution procedures for the resulting ders. They showed that the presence of interruptions

ARTICLE IN PRESS

A.A. Alamri, Z.T. Balkhi / Int. J. Production Economics 107 (2007) 125138 127

results in longer cycle runs causing further increase the empirical ndings reported by Nembhard and

in labor and inventory costs. These costs tend to be Uzumeri (2000) in an industrial setting (Jaber and

more critical in the case when only a partial Kher, 2002). Scientists and practitioners have not

transmission of learning is assumed. For more yet agreed on acceptable form affecting the forget-

details about learning and forgetting, see the out- ting process. This is due to the difculties involved

standing review of Jaber and Bonney (1999). Jaber in obtaining the time in which total forgetting

and Bonney (1997) studied the differences and occurs. Jaber and Kher (2004) improved the

similarities of three previously proposed models of limitation of the LFCM, which assumes a xed

learning and forgetting effects. These models are the value for the total time of forgetting by proposing

LFCM (1996), the variable regression to invariant the following lower bound:

forgetting (VRIF) (Elmaghraby, 1990), and the

variable regression to variable forgetting (VRVF) d max X virr1 1 tvi ,

(Carlson and Rowe, 1976). They found that the

LFCM satises two relationships, the rst one is where dmax is the time in which total forgetting

that when total forgetting occurs, the time to occurs, t(vi) is the time required to perform vi tasks,

produce a unit reverts to the time required to and r is the learning slope. They used regression

produce the rst unit at the beginning of the methods to determine the parameters of the forget-

process, and the second relationship is that the ting curve which depend on the estimated value of

performance time on the learning curve equals that dmax. Jaber and Sikstrom (2004) investigated and

on the forgetting curve at the point of interruption. discussed the differences and similarities of three

Whereas the VRIF satises the rst one and the promising models. These models are the LFCM

VRVF satises the second one. Jaber et al. (2003) (Jaber and Bonney, 1996), the RC (Nembhard and

studied training and deployment polices using the Uzumeri, 2000), and the power integration diffusion

LFCM, and then they identied seven character- (PID) (Sikstrom and Jaber, 2002). The results

istics of forgetting that should be considered by indicate that for a moderate learning scenario, the

learning and forgetting models. These characteris- three models produce very close predictions to one

tics are (1) the amount of experience gained before another for all values of production breaks and

interruption occurs in the learning process inu- initial processing times. Furthermore, the PID and

ences the level of forgetting, (2) the length of the RC models, and the PID and the LFCM models,

interruption interval inuences the level of forget- could be best differentiated for cases characterised

ting, (3) relearning rate is the same as the original by high initial processing times, long production

learning rate, (4) the power function is appropriate breaks, and tasks that identied as being more

for capturing forgetting, (5) learning and forgetting motor than cognitive. Numerical results for the PID

are mirror images of each other, (6) the level of and LFCM suggested that as learning becomes

forgetting depends upon the rate at which a worker slower forgetting becomes faster. This result is

learns, and (7) the nature of the task being inconsistent with that of the RC model, which

performed inuences the amount of forgetting. suggests that fast (slow) learners forget faster

Further, they evaluated the extent to which existing (slower). It seems from the above review that several

learning and forgetting models incorporate these researchers have shown that the LFCM is advanta-

characteristics. They found that the LFCM incor- geous to some of the models being investigated. The

porates six out of the seven characteristics. They above-mentioned authors assumed a constant de-

also introduced a modication to the LFCM mand rate and did not incorporate product dete-

to accommodate the degree of task similarity. rioration in their models, though time varying

Jaber and Sikstrom (2004) tted the LFCM demand and product deterioration rates have been

to the empirical data provided by Nembhard and frequently treated in the literature. The assumption

Osothsilp (2001). They showed that the LFCM of a constant demand rate is usually valid in the

performed better than the recency model (RC) of mature stage of the life cycle of the product. In the

Nembhard and Uzumeri (2000), who based their growth and/or ending stage of the product life cycle

studied on the assumption of varying learning demand rate can be well approximated by a linear

slopes. Jaber and Kher (2002) showed that if demand function. In fact, the variation of demand

individual learns rapidly, then he tends to forget and /or product deterioration with time (and may

rapidly. Such behavior of the model coincides with be with some other factors) is a quite natural

ARTICLE IN PRESS

128 A.A. Alamri, Z.T. Balkhi / Int. J. Production Economics 107 (2007) 125138

phenomenon. For instance, seasonal variations, The process is repeated. The behavior of such

occasions (e.g., Christmases, new years, festivals) system is depicted in Fig. 1.

may cause an increase or decrease in the demand of The changes in the inventory level depicted in

certain commodity. Also, the increase of time Fig. 1 are given by the following differential equations:

storage as well as the changes in the environments dI j t

of storage may also result in an increase or decrease Pt Dt dtI j t; T 0j ptoT 1j (4)

dt

in the deterioration rate of certain items.

with the initial condition I j T 0j 0, and

3. Formulation of the general model dI j t

Dt dtI j t; T 1j ptpT 2j (5)

dt

In this paper, we shall generalize the work of with the ending condition I j T 2j 0.

Jaber and Bonney (1996) under the following The solutions of the above differential equa-

assumptions: tions are

Z t

1. A single item is produced in batches at an I j t egt Pu Du egu du; T 0j ptoT 1j ,

increasing production rate (due to learning) T 0j

denoted by P(t). (6)

2. The items are subject to deterioration and there is Z T 2j

no repair or replacement of deteriorated items.

I j t egt Du egu du; T 1j ptpT 2j , (7)

3. The demand and deterioration rates are arbitrary t

functions of time denoted by D(t) and d(t), respectively, where

respectively. Z

4. We shall require that Dta0, dta0, D0 ta0 gt dt dt. (8)

and d0 ta08tX0.

R t2

5. The instantaneous production rate at time t is Let It1 ; t2 t1 Iu du, then from (6) and (7) we

given by the following differential equation have

dqt Z T 1j

Pt, (3) I j T 0j ; T 1j egt

dt

T 0j

where q(t ) is the number of units produced up to Z !

t

time t. Pu Du e gu

du dt, 9

6. The production process is subject to learnforge- T 0j

tlearn. Z

Z T 2j T 2j

7. The time in which total forgetting occurs is a

I j T 1j ; T 2j egt Du egu du dt,

function of the number of units remembered. T 1j t

8. Shortages are not allowed.

(10)

9. The cost parameters are as follows: a labor

cost per unit time; c unit cost, which includes respectively.

materials cost; h unit holding cost per unit per

unit time; k setup cost per cycle.

Inventory level

operating at time T0j by which the production

process starts and the inventory level increases at a

rate Pt Dt dtI j t until time T1j where the

inventory level reaches its maximum, and the

production stopped. The system now is subject to

T0 j T1 j T2 j Time

forgetting from time T1j up to time T2j. During this

intervening period, the inventory level declines Cycle length

continuously at a rate Dt dtI j t where it Fig. 1. Inventory variation of an economic production quantity

becomes zero by time T2j (the end of the cycle). (EPQ) model under learningforgetting effects for one cycle.

ARTICLE IN PRESS

A.A. Alamri, Z.T. Balkhi / Int. J. Production Economics 107 (2007) 125138 129

Now using integration by parts, Eq. (9) is re- fact that the inventory level must have an equal

duced to value for t T 1j . Thus, our goal is to solve the

Z T 1j following optimization problem, which we shall call

I j T 0j ; T 1j GT 1j Gu problem (p)

T 0j (

Minimize ZT 1j ; T 2j given by 14;

Pu Du egu du, 11 p

subject to 15 and g1 0;

similarly, Eq. (10) is reduced to

Z T 2j where

I j T 1j ; T 2j Gu GT 1j Du egu du, Z T 1j Z T 2j

T 1j gu

g1 Pu Du e du Du egu du.

(12) 0 T 1j

where

Z The solution procedure for similar problem has

been introduced in details in Balkhi (1998, 2000,

Gt egt dt. (13)

2003). The most important point to be remembered

from Balkhi (1998, 2000, 2003) is that, if we

Note that we can set T 0j 0 without loss of

temporarily ignore the monotony constraints (15)

generality. Now, the per cycle cost components for

and call the resulting problem as (p1) then as a result

the given inventory system are as follows:

from the Kuhn-Tucker necessary conditions, rela-

tion (15) do satisfy any solution of (p1). Hence

The labor cost R aT1j.

T (p)and (p1) are equivalent. Next, we shall introduce

Items cost c 0 1j Pu du. Note that this cost

the relationship between learning and forgetting.

includes the deterioration cost.

Holding cost hI j 0; T 1j I j T 1j ; T 2j .

4. The learnforgetlearn (LFL) relationship

Thus, the total cost per unit time of the under-

lying inventory system during the cycle [0, T2j], as a Let bj denotes the amount of equivalent units of

function of T1j and T2j say ZT 1j ; T 2j is given by experience remembered at the beginning of produc-

Z T 1j tion run j, with the initial amount b1 0. In each

1

Z T 1j ; T 2j aT 1j c Pu du h production run j (j 1, 2, y), the system starts the

T 2j 0 production stage at time T0j, in which learning takes

Z T 1j

place and the amount bj increases due to learning

GT 1j Gu Pu Du egu du effect up to time T1j by which the production ceases,

0

Z T 2j # ) and the level of equivalent units of experience

gu

Gu GT 1j Du e du k , 14 increases by Qj units, where Qj is the number of

T 1j units produced in cycle j. At this time the forgetting

phenomenon starts its inuence so that the amount

where g(u) is given by (8) and G(u) is given by (13).

of equivalent units of experience bj Qj will

Our goal is to nd T1j and T2j, that minimize

decrease due to forgetting up to time T2j where an

ZT 1j ; T 2j where ZT 1j ; T 2j is given by (14). But

equivalent amount bj+1 bj1 pbj Qj is reached

the variables T1j and T2j are related to each other

and the recommencement for the next production

through the following relations:

run is restarted. The process is repeated. It is to be

0oT 1j oT 2j , (15) noted that in the case that the transmission of

Z learning from cycle to cycle does not occur, then

T 1j

bj1 bj 0 and t1j1 t1j t11 , where t1j is the

egT 1j Pu Du egu du

0 time required to produce the rst unit in cycle j.

Z T 2j Moreover, for the case there is a full transmission

P of

egT 1j Du egu du. 16 learning from cycle to cycle, then bj1 ji1 Qi

T 1j

and t1j1 pt1j . Note that the equality allows the

Relation (15) represents the natural monotony possibility that t1j tmin 40. Fig. 2 depicts the effect

constraints, since otherwise the given problem, of learning and forgetting on the time required to

would have no meaning. Relation (16) ensures the produce a unit.

ARTICLE IN PRESS

130 A.A. Alamri, Z.T. Balkhi / Int. J. Production Economics 107 (2007) 125138

5. Model formulation under (LFL) there had been no interruption in the production,

then from (18) we have

First, we shall present an approximation form for

t11 1r

(1). Let tij be the time required to produce the ith T 2j T 0j bj Qj S j b1r

j .

unit in the jth cycle then, from (1) and the denition 1r

of bj we have (22)

tij t11 bj ir . (17) Next, we shall present an approximation form for

(2). Let t^mj be the equivalent time to produce the mth

From (17), if tj is the time required to produce qj unit of lost experience in the jth cycle of the

units in the jth cycle, where tj XT 1j and qjXQj, then forgetting curve, then from (2) and the denition of

bj qj

X Z bj qj bj we have

tj t11 kr t11 kr dk l

kbj bj t^mj t^1j bj m j . (23)

1r

t11

bj q j b1r

j . 18 The time required to produce the rst unit at the

1r beginning of production run j+1 can be found from

Solving for qj, the total number of units produced (17) in terms of bj+1 as follows:

up to time tj is given by r

t1j1 t11 bj1 1 . (24)

1=1r

1 rtj

qj tj b1r

j bj . (19) The amount of equivalent units of experience by

t11

time T1j, where the production ceases is equal to the

From which and (3) we have same amount at the beginning of the forgetting

h ir=1r phase, namely bj Qj , which is the experience

1 rtj =t11 bj1r gained plus the amount produced in the interval

Pj tj . (20) [T0j, T1j]. This can be obtained by equating Eqs. (17)

t11 and (23) yielding

Thus, if Qj is the amount produced in the interval r l j

[T0j, T1j], then from (18) we have t11 bj Qj t^1j bj Qj . (25)

t11 1r

1r Thus, for each interruption, the intercept of the

T 1j T 0j bj Qj bj . (21)

1r forgetting curve in the jth cycle is given by

rl j

Also, if Sj is the amount that could have been

t^1j t11 bj Qj . (26)

produced in the interval [T1j, T2j] assuming that

t11

Time

t1 j

01 j + Qj j + Qj + Sj j + Qj + Yj

Number of units

Fig. 2. The effect of learning and forgetting on the time required to produce a unit.

ARTICLE IN PRESS

A.A. Alamri, Z.T. Balkhi / Int. J. Production Economics 107 (2007) 125138 131

rl j l j

t^Qj t11 bj Qj bj Qj . r log bj Qj

lj h i. (30)

log 1 Y j =bj Qj

The amount of equivalent units of experience at

time T2j, where the forgetting phase ceases is equal

to bj+1, which is the experience retained at the end Now, let us suggest an approximation form for

of the cycle. This amount can be obtained by cQj Y j so that

equating Eqs. (23) and (17) where we obtain

bj Qj

t^1j bj Qj Sj l j t11 br

j1 .

Yj . (31)

t1j

Further discussion on how to compute Yj is

l j rl j provided in Appendix A.

t11 br

j1 t11 bj Qj S j bj Qj . In Eq. (31), we consider the value of t1j as a

constant that takes on distinct values that depend

Solving for bj+1 we obtain on the corresponding j until it attains a stable value,

i.e. t1j tmin 40. Therefore, the value of Yj is

2 l j 31=r measured in units and depends on three known

bj Qj S j values, which vary from cycle to cycle to allow

6 7

bj1 4 rl j 5 . (27) variable total forgetting breaks. To justify such

bj Qj suggestion, we note that right-hand side (RHS) of

(31) is a function of the number of units remem-

Now, let cQj Y j be the corresponding quan- bered at the point of interruption and the time

tity that could have been produced during the required to produce the rst unit at the beginning of

interval [T1j, tlj], where tlj XT 2j under the assump- production run j. So it is quite reasonable to say

tion that there had been no interruption in the that as the produced units build up, the total

production, then from (18) we have forgetting accumulates. Also, note that Yj levels off

once bj and (t1j and Qj) attain their maximum

t11 1r

1r (minimum) values, respectively. Thus, the forgetting

tlj T 0j bj Qj Y j bj . (28)

1r slope can be rewritten as

Suppose that tlj is the time required to forget the r log bj Qj

lj . (32)

equivalent amount of bj Qj units of experience, log 1 1=t1j

then the amount of experience retained by time tlj

can be obtained by equating Eqs. (23) and (17) In Eq. (32), if there is no learning involved, i.e.

yielding r 0 then there is nothing to forget, i.e. lj 0. Note

that we can normalize our scales so that t1j can take

l j

on a value less than one unit of time, i.e. t1j o1.

t^1j bj Qj Y j t11 , (29)

Also, for the case that the time for total forgetting is

assumed to be xed, then this model still valid by

Substituting (26) in (29) we obtain using Eq. (30), since the value of Yj is known by Eq.

l j rl j (19).

bj Qj Y j bj Qj 1. Now, for T 0j 0, (21) implies

t11 1r

T 1j bj Qj bj1r . (33)

Taking the logarithm of both sides, we obtain 1r

From (33) we note that T1j can be determined as a

r log bj Qj

lj , function of bj and Qj, hence of Qj, say

log bj Qj Y j log bj Qj T 1j f 1j Qj . (34)

ARTICLE IN PRESS

132 A.A. Alamri, Z.T. Balkhi / Int. J. Production Economics 107 (2007) 125138

h h i i

Z T 1j Z T 2j f 2j af 01j;Qj f 01j;Qj Pf 1j c h egf 1j Gf 2j Gf 1j

gu

Pue du Du egu du. (35) w

f 02j;Qj

.

0 0

(42)

From which and (34) we nd that T2jcan be

Also, (39)

determined as a function of T1j, hence of Qj, say

w w0Q

T 2j f 2j Qj . (36) 3W 0 j , (43)

f 2j f 2j;Qj

Thus, if we substitute (16), (34) and (36) in (14) where W is given by (37) and w0Qj is given by (41).

then problem (p)will be converted to the following Eq. (42) can, now, be used to determine the optimal

unconstrained problem with the variable Qj (which value of Qj. Then the optimal values of T1j and T2j

we shall call problem (p2)) can be found from (34) and (36), respectively,

Z f 1j whereas the minimum total cost can be determined

1 from (43).

minimize W Qj af 1j c Pu du

f 2j 0

Z f 1j Remark 1. In this remark we shall give some of the

h Gu Pu Du egu du properties of the instantaneous production rate.

0

Z # )

f 2j (A) If the system is subject to no learning, i.e. r 0

GuDu egu du k . 37 then Eqs. (19) and (20) are reduced to qj tj

f 1j

tj =t11 and Pj tj 1=t11 , respectively. Note here

that, when tj 0 then Eq. (20) is reduced to

Note that the unconstrained case happens since

(34) and (36) were obtained by direct substitution brj

from one into the other and by direct substitution in Pj 0 . (44)

t11

the objective function.

Now, the necessary condition for having a Also, if r 0 then Eq. (44) is reduced to

minimum for problem (p2) is Pj 0 1=t11 . Further, P1 0 br1 =t11 0

dW which represents the initial production rate,

0. (38) since b1 0. These results imply that Pj(tj) is

dQj

dependent on the amount of equivalent units of

To nd the solution of (38), let W w=f 2j then experience remembered at the beginning of

0 0 production run j. This is so, since both the slope

dW wQj f 2j f 2j;Qj w of the learning curve and the time required to

,

dQj f 22j produce the rst unit have xed values.

(B) In the case where the transmission of learning

where w0Qj and f 02j;Qj are the derivatives of w and f 2j from cycle to cycle does not occur, then

with respect to (w.r.t) Qj, respectively. Hence, (38) is

equivalent to r=1r

1 rtj =t11

w0Qj f 2j f 02j;Qj w. (39) Pj tj . (45)

t11

Also, taking the rst derivative of both sides of

(16), (w.r.t) Qj we obtain On the other hand, denote f1j as the time

required to produce Qj units in cycle j, then this

f 01j;Qj Pf 1j egf 1j f 02j;Qj Df 2j egf 2j . (40) time remains constant in each cycle. As a result,

the production rate at the end of each produc-

tion period j is given by

From which, (34), (36), and (37) we have

r=1r

w0Qj af 01j;Qj f 01j;Qj Pf 1j 1 rf 11 =t11

Pj f 1j P1 f 11 .

h i t11

c hegf 1j Gf 2j Gf 1j . 41 (46)

ARTICLE IN PRESS

A.A. Alamri, Z.T. Balkhi / Int. J. Production Economics 107 (2007) 125138 133

Further, in the case that there is a full First, we shall calculate the theoretical functions

transmission of learning from cycle to cycle, f ij , f 0ij;Qj i 1; 2, and w as they are dened in the

then previous sections for the above demand rate. Now,

h ir=1r from (33) and (34) we have

1 rf 1j =t11 b1r

j t11 1r

Pj f 2j Pj f 1j f 1j bj Q j b1r

j . (49)

t11 1r

brj1

Pj1 0 , 47 From which, (16) and (20) we have

t11 h ir=1r

P Z f 1j 1 ru=t11 b1r

where bj1 ji1 Qi , and f2j is the cycle j

du

length. 0 t11

Z f 2j

(C) Finally, in the case that there is a partial

transmission of learning from cycle to cycle, bu d du.

0

then

h ir=1r Recalling (19), the last relation implies

1 rf xj =t11 b1r
1=1r

Pj f 2j Pj f xj

j 1 rf 1j bf 22j

t11 b1r

j df 2j bj .

t11 2

brj1

Pj1 0 , 48 From which f2j is given by

t11

s

where f xj is the time required to produce xj 1=1r

1rf 1j b1r t11

units, xj is the number of units retained in each 2d 2 d 2 2b t11

j

2bbj

cycle j and added to the previous experience, f 2j .

2b

and bj+1 is the amount of equivalent units of

(50)

experience remembered at the beginning of

production run j+1(or the experience retained (Note here that, values of f 2j o0 are to be

at the end of cycle j). Note that xj oQj and rejected.) Now, from the above relations we have

bj1 obj Qj . r

f 01j;Qj t11 bj Qj , (51)

In order to avoid mathematical complications and h ir=1r

for ease of computations, we shall t our model f 01j;Qj 1 rf 1j =t11 bj1r

without product deterioration so that we can easily f 02j;Qj . (52)

bf 2j dt11

compare our results with the results of the most

relevant papers particularly with that of Jaber and Using these results and with some algebra, then

Bonney (1998). from (37) we have

1=1r !

1 rf 1j 1r

6. An illustrative example for the (LFL) case and w af 1j bj bj

t11

numerical verication !

ht11 bj1r ht11

As an example of time varying demand rate, c

1 r 1 r2 r

which has a wide use in the literature we shall
2r=1r !

consider a production lot-size inventory model with 1 rf 1j 1r 2r

bj bj

a linear demand rate function given by t11

Dt bt d; d40; tX0. hbf 32j hdf 22j

k. 53

The parameter b represents the rate of change 3 2

in the demand rate. The case b 0 allows the Now, (53) is to be substituted in (42) in order to

possibility for a constant demand rate where then nd the solution of the given example.

Dt d, 8tX0. Also, if b 0 and the system is The above theoretical results have been coded in

subject to a full transmission of learning, then this a nonlinear package for several values of the

model gives the model of Salamah et al. (1993). model parameters from which we have chosen the

ARTICLE IN PRESS

134 A.A. Alamri, Z.T. Balkhi / Int. J. Production Economics 107 (2007) 125138

following specic values so that we can compare our are shown in Table 1. In the rst cycle, we have

numerical results with those obtained by previous taken t11 .0625 days resulted in a total number of

authors. Q1 111 units, which produced at time T11 4.81

days, and consumed by time T21 6.99 days. These

The slope of the learning r 0.1.

optimal values can be determined from Eqs. (49)

curve

and (50) as

The time required to produce t11 0.0625 days

the rst unit in the rst cycle 0:0625

T 11 0 1110:9 00:9 4:81 days,

Unit cost c $50 0:9

Unit holding cost per unit per h $0.1

day

r

h i

1=0:9

0:94:8100:9 0:0625

2 15 2 152 2 0:25 0:0625 2 0:25 0

T 21 6:99 days;

2 0:25

Labor cost per day a $80 respectively. The amount that could have been

Setup cost per cycle k $300 produced if the production had not been interrupted

Parameters of demand rate b 0.25 unit/day, over the interval [T11, T21] can be determined from

d 15 units/day Eq. (19) or (22) as

1=0:9

The optimal values of Qj, T1j, T2j, lj, bj+1, t1j, P(T1j), 0:9 6:99

Q1 S1 q1 6:99 00:9 0

P(T2j), and the corresponding total minimum cost 0:0625

for 23 successive cycles are obtained and the results 168 units

or

Table 1

0:0625 h 0:9 i

Optimal results under partial transmission of learning for the 6:99 0 0 Q1 S 1 00:9

illustrative example with r 0.1, which corresponds to an 93.3% 0:9

learning rate 168 units:

Cycle t1j Qj bj T1j T2j P(T1j) P(T2j) lj W w This means that the system has lost the oppor-

no. j

tunity of producing 57 additional units over a

1 0.0625 111 0 4.81 6.99 25.62 23.92 0.1662 893 6244 period of T 21 T 11 2:18 days due to the inter-

2 0.0417 107 56 4.18 6.73 26.62 25.17 0.1582 888 5977 ruption. The forgetting slope after the rst inter-

3 0.0397 106 93 4.03 6.68 27.16 25.82 0.1621 887 5927

4 0.0387 106 120 3.94 6.66 27.51 26.22 0.1647 886 5903 ruption is given from Eq. (32) as

5 0.0381 105 140 3.89 6.65 27.51 26.50 0.1665 886 5890 0:1 log0 111

6 0.0377 105 155 3.86 6.64 27.74 26.70 0.1678 885 5881 l1 1

0:1662,

7 0.0374 105 167 3.83 6.64 27.90 26.84 0.1687 885 5875 log 1 0:0625

8 0.0372 105 176 3.82 6.63 28.01 26.95 0.1694 885 5871

9 0.0371 105 184 3.80 6.63 28.20 27.04 0.1701 885 5667 which corresponds to an 89.12% forgetting rate.

10 0.0370 105 190 3.79 6.63 28.25 27.11 0.1706 885 5865 The intercept of the forgetting curve after the rst

11 0.0369 105 195 3.78 6.63 28.30 27.16 0.1710 885 5862

12 0.0368 105 199 3.77 6.63 28.34 27.21 0.1712 885 5861 interruption can be determined from Eq. (26) as

13 0.0367 105 202 3.77 6.62 28.37 27.24 0.1714 885 5860

t^11 0:06250 1110:10:1662 0:0178 days:

14 0.0367 105 204 3.77 6.62 28.39 27.26 0.1716 885 5859

15 0.0367 105 206 3.76 6.62 28.40 27.28 0.1718 884 5858

16 0.0366 105 208 3.76 6.62 28.42 27.30 0.1718 884 5858

The amount of equivalent units of experience

17 0.0366 105 209 3.76 6.62 28.43 27.31 0.1719 884 5857 remembered at the beginning of the next production

18 0.0366 105 210 3.76 6.62 28.44 27.32 0.1720 884 5857 run, after an interruption period of T 21 T 11

19 0.0366 105 211 3.75 6.62 28.45 27.33 0.1721 884 5857

20 0.0366 105 212 3.75 6.62 28.46 27.34 0.1722 884 5856

2:18 days, is given from Eq. (27) as

21 0.0365 105 213 3.75 6.62 28.47 27.35 0.1723 884 5856
1=0:1

22 0.0365 105 213 3.75 6.62 28.47 27.35 0.1721 884 5856 0 1680:1662

b2 56 units:

23 0.0365 105 213 3.75 6.62 28.47 27.35 0.1721 884 5856

0 1110:10:1662

ARTICLE IN PRESS

A.A. Alamri, Z.T. Balkhi / Int. J. Production Economics 107 (2007) 125138 135

The production rate at the end of production units build up, the total forgetting accumulates. The

period T 11 4:81 days, can be determined from tabulated results indicate that the time required to

Eq. (20) as produce the rst unit, the total minimum cost per

0:94:81 day and the total minimum cost per cycle (last two

0:9 0:1=0:9

0:0625 0 columns in Table 1, respectively), and the total time

P1 4:81

0:0625 required to produce the optimum production

25:62 units=day: quantity decrease as the number of production runs

increase. The decrease in both the optimum

The production rate at the cycle end quantity produced and the cycle length, as shown

T 21 6:99 days, can be determined from Eq. (20) in columns 3 and 6, respectively, also reect these

or (48) as reductions. Such decreases are due to the increase in

0:92:6

0:9 0:1=0:9 the production rate for successive cycles. Note that

0:0625 0 the number of units retained in each cycle j

P1 2:6 23:92 units=day;

0:0625 decreases for successive cycles. This decrease, in

where T x1 2:6 days is the theoretical time required fact, is due to the increase of the length of the

to produce the number of units retained in the rst consumption period in which forgetting occurs

cycle and added to the previous experience, i.e. compared to the production period. The decrease

x1 b2 b1 56 0 56 units in the production rate at the end of each cycle is due

to the forgetting effect occurs during the non-

or production period. The slight decrease in both the

optimum quantity produced and the cycle length

br2 560:1

P1 6:99 23:92 units=day: may be justied by the presence of linear trend in

t11 0:0625 demand rate, which results in slight decrease in

These results signify that the instantaneous labor and inventory costs. Such demand rate

production rate can be computed at any given time. suggests that the optimal policy is to produce small

The percentage of wasted effort (PWE) after an quantities in each cycle. The production quantity

interruption period of T 21 T 11 2:18 days, can and the cycle length level off after the fourth and

be determined as 13th cycle respectively, while the system reaches

steady-state situation after the 22nd cycle. (Recall

25:62 23:92

PWE 100 7:1%. Table 1.)

23:92 In the example provided by Jaber and Bonney

Finally, from Eq. (24) we found the time required (1998) they have taken r 0.1, t11 0.0625

to produce the rst unit in the second cycle, days, c $100; h $0:2, a $80, k $200,

namely unit number 112 is equal to t112 d 12 units/day.

0:062556 10:1 0:04174 days. If the system is For comparison purposes, we have tted these

subject to a full transmission of learning, then the values in our model with b 0 and obtained the

time required to produce the unit number 112 is numerical results as tabulated below (Table 2).

equal to t112 0:0625111 10:1 0.03899 days.

The same procedure is repeated for the other cycles.

It is worth noting here, that in the rst cycle, Table 2

Eq. (31) yields Y 1 0 111=0:0625 1776 units, Optimal results under partial transmission of learning for the

and then substituting this value in Eq. (28), the time same set of values as in Jaber and Bonney (1998)

in which total forgetting occurs is equal to Cycle t1j Qj bj T1j T2j P(T1j) P(T2j) lj W w

tl1 61:64 days. This result implies that the experi- no. j

ence gained from producing the rst lot in a period

1 0.0625 248 0 9.92 20.67 27.77 23.71 0.1946 1260 26046

of T 11 4:81 days, is totally forgotten after an 2 0.0421 228 51 8.66 19.04 28.10 24.70 0.1755 1259 23974

interruption period of tl1T11 61.644.81 3 0.0404 224 77 8.35 18.66 28.31 25.04 0.1757 1259 23489

4 0.0399 222 88 8.24 18.53 28.40 25.17 0.1760 1259 23323

56.82 days2 months.

5 0.0397 222 93 8.19 18.48 28.44 25.25 0.1761 1258 23253

In the second cycle, we have T12 4.18 days, 6 0.0396 221 96 8.17 18.45 28.46 25.28 0.1763 1258 23213

Y2 3909 units, tl2 120.55 days, and t12Tl2 7 0.0395 221 97 8.16 18.44 28.47 25.31 0.1762 1258 23200

8 0.0395 221 98 8.15 18.43 28.48 25.31 0.1763 1258 23187

120.554.18 116.35 days4 months. These re-

9 0.0395 221 98 8.15 18.43 28.48 25.31 0.1763 1258 23187

sults coincide with the fact that as the produced

ARTICLE IN PRESS

136 A.A. Alamri, Z.T. Balkhi / Int. J. Production Economics 107 (2007) 125138

The results in Table 2 indicate that our model is t249 0.0625(248+1)0.1 0.0360 days. These re-

consistent with that of Jaber and Bonney (1998). sults are identical with that of Jaber and Bonney

The only notable difference is that the number of (1998). Consequently, the proposed model is prac-

units remembered in this model is less than that of ticable for two cases, the case in which the time for

Jaber and Bonney (1998). This may be justied by total forgetting is assumed to be of xed value, and

the difference in the time in which total forgetting the case in which the approximation presented

occurs, where in our case, we have considered that herein is applied.

this time is dependent on the number of units

remembered at the point of interruption and the 7. Concluding remarks

time required to produce the rst unit at the

beginning of production run j. Moreover, let us In this paper, we generalize and reformulate the

assume that the time for total forgetting is of xed LFCM presented by Jaber and Bonney (1996). The

value and is set to be equal to 300 days as in Jaber generality of our model comes from the fact that the

and Bonney (1998). Then, from Eq. (19) we have demand and product deterioration rates are arbi-

1=0:9 trary functions of time. A new denition of the

0:9 300 0:9 production rate together with its properties is

Y 1 q1 300 248 248

0:0625 introduced as the instantaneous number of units

11; 105 units produced. The advantageous of this denition is

that it can compute the production rate at any given

substituting this value in Eq. (30), then the

time. Hence, it may be applicable in many areas in

forgetting slope l1 is computed as

which the units remembered are treated as the

0:1 log0 248 performance level. The forgetting slope is repre-

l1 h i 0:1442,

11105

log 1 0248 sented by an approximation of the minimum break

to which the manufacturer assumes total forgetting

which corresponds to an 90.49% forgetting rate. as a function of the number of units remembered at

The amount that could have been produced if the the point of interruption and the time required to

production had not been interrupted over the produce the rst unit at the beginning of production

interval [T11, T21] is given from Eq. (19) or run j so that it allows variable total forgetting

Eq. (22) as breaks. We believe that this is reasonable since total

1=0:9 forgetting breaks should vary from cycle to cycle. In

0:9 20:67 0:9 order to avoid mathematical complications, and to

Q1 S1 q1 20:67 0 0

0:0625 easily compare our numerical results with those

560 units obtained by previous authors we dropped the

product deterioration from the illustrative example

or

but we kept it in the formulation of the general

0:0625 h 0:9 i

model. An illustrative example for the LFL case,

20:67 0 0 Q1 S 1 00:9

0:9 which explains the application of the theoretical

560 units: results under partial transmission of learning and a

numerical verication of this illustrative example

The amount of equivalent units of experience are also given. The obtained numerical results

remembered at the beginning of the next production clearly reect the incorporated learning and forget-

run, after an interruption period of T21T11 ting effects in the proposed model. The incorpora-

20.679.92 10.75 days, is given from Eq. (27) as tion of linear demand function suggests that the

1=0:1 optimal policy is to produce small quantities in each

0 5600:1442

b2 77 units: cycle. This suggestion is found to have two major

0 2480:10:1442 properties, the rst one is that it decreases the cycle

From Eq. (24) we found the time required to length, and the second one is that it increases the

produce the rst unit in the second cycle, namely experience gained causing further decrease in the

unit number 249 is equal to t249 0.0625(77+1)0.1 time required to produce the unit for each

0.0404 days. If the system experiences a full consecutive cycle. We also verify the example given

transmission of learning, then the time required to in Jaber and Bonney (1998) and nd very close

produce the unit number 249 is equal to results. Further, we illustrate the possibility that the

ARTICLE IN PRESS

A.A. Alamri, Z.T. Balkhi / Int. J. Production Economics 107 (2007) 125138 137

proposed model can t both the xed value for total Table 3

forgetting and the approximation presented herein. Approximation results under partial transmission of learning for

We show that attening can now be achieved by our t11 0.0625 days, Qj Q1 200 units, T2jT1j 10 days, and

r 0.1, which corresponds to an 93.3% learning rate

approximation to the denition of total forgetting.

The general learnforget curve model (GLFCM) Cycle T1j Qj Sj bj T1j T2j lj Yj Yj/bj+Qj 1/t1j

no. j

proposed herein incorporates (1)(6) out of (7)

characteristics of forgetting that should be consid- 1 0.0625 200 285.9 0 8.176 18.176 0.1870 3200 16 16

ered by learning and forgetting models identied by 2 0.0433 200 289.2 38.03 7.728 17.728 0.1720 5494 23.08 23.08

3 0.0414 200 291.0 60.61 7.584 17.584 0.1725 6296 24.16 24.16

Jaber et al. (2003). This seems to be the rst time 4 0.0407 200 291.9 71.50 7.526 17.526 0.1729 6667 24.56 24.56

where such GLFCM is formulated, investigated, and 5 0.0404 200 292.3 76.84 7.499 17.499 0.1732 6847 24.73 24.73

6 0.0403 200 292.5 79.50 7.486 17.486 0.1733 6936 24.81 24.81

numerically veried. Based on the ndings presented 7 0.0402 200 292.6 80.82 7.480 17.480 0.1733 6980 24.85 24.85

herein, further research to test the GLFCM against 8 0.0402 200 292.6 81.48 7.477 17.477 0.1734 7002 24.87 24.87

empirical data may enhance our understanding of 9 0.0402 200 292.6 81.82 7.475 17.475 0.1734 7013 24.88 24.88

relation, the value of t1j is considered as a constant

The authors would like to express their great only for approximation purposes, elsewhere, t1j is

thanks for the valuable remarks and suggestions of the time needed to produce the rst unit in cycle j,

the referees, which greatly improved the paper. which is measured in units of time/unit. This

approximation is simply our suggestion to over-

Appendix A. Checking the approximation of Yj come the inadequacy in the assumption that the

value for total forgetting is xed. Therefore,

First, we shall recall Eqs. (26), (29) and (30) substituting (A.4) in (A.3), the forgetting slope can

be rewritten as

t^1j t11 bj Qj rl j , (A.1)

l j r log bj Qj

lj h i . (A.5)

t^1j bj Qj Y j t11 , (A.2)

log 1 t11j

r log bj Qj As the approximation of Y j =bj Qj by 1=t1j

lj h i, (A.3) produces very close results for the parameters

Yj

log 1 b Q suggested in Tables 1 and 2, it also works ne, as

j j

we shall see, when using different parameters

respectively. Substituting (A.1) in (A.2) we obtain suggested in Table 3. Now, consider the case where

l j rl j

an interruption in the production run occurs each

bj Qj Y j bj Qj 1,

time the batch size reaches 200 units, the length of

rl j =l j the break is arbitrarily set for a period of 10 days,

) bj Qj Y j bj Qj 1,

and the time required to produce the rst unit in the

r=l j rst cycle is t11 0.0625 days.

bj Qj

) bj Q j Y j 1,

bj Qj References

r=l j

r=l j bj Qj Adler, G.L., Nanda, R., 1974. The effects of learning on optimal

) bj Qj Yj 1, lot determination, single product case. AIIE Transactions 6,

bj Qj 1420.

Balkhi, Z.T., 1998. On the Global optimality of a general

Yj 1 1

) r=l j 1 , A:4 production lot size inventory model for deterioration items.

bj Qj t 1j Belgium Journal of Operations Research, Statistic and

b j Qj Computer Science 38, 3344.

r Balkhi, Z.T., 2000. View point on the optimal production

where t1j t11 bj 1 . Note here that, our goal is stopping and restarting times for EOQ model with deteriora-

to suggest an approximation form of Yj, which tion items. Journal of Operations Research Society 51,

depends upon the value of lj, where these two values 9991003.

ARTICLE IN PRESS

138 A.A. Alamri, Z.T. Balkhi / Int. J. Production Economics 107 (2007) 125138

Balkhi, Z.T., 2003. The effect of learning on the optimal Jaber, M.Y., Kher, H.V., 2004. Variant versus invariant time to

production lot size for deteriorating and partially back- total forgetting: The learnforget curve model revisited.

ordered items with time varying demand and deterioration Computer and Industrial Engineering 46, 697705.

rates. Applied Mathematical Modelling 27, 763779. Jaber, M.Y., Kher, H.V., Davis, D.J., 2003. Countering

Carlson, J.G.H., 1975. Learning, lost time and economic forgetting through training and deployment. International

production. Production and Inventory Management, 2033. Journal of Production Economics 85, 3346.

Carlson, J.G., Rowe, R.G., 1976. How much does forgetting Jaber, M.Y., Sikstrom, S., 2004. A note on an empirical

cost? Industrial Engineering 8, 4047. comparison of forgetting models. IEEE Transactions on

Elmaghraby, S.E., 1990. Economic manufacturing quantities Engineering Management 51, 233234.

under conditions of learning and forgetting (EMQ/LaF). Jaber, M.Y., Sikstrom, S., 2004. A numerical comparison of three

Production Planning and Control 1, 196208. potential learning and forgetting models. International

Globerson, S., Levin, N., Shtub, A., 1989. The impact of breaks Journal of Production Economics 92, 281294.

on forgetting when performing a repetitive task. AIIE Muth, E.J., Spermann, K., 1983. Learning effects in economic lot

Transactions 21, 376381. sizing. Management Science 29, 264269.

Hancock, W.M., 1967. The prediction of learning rates for manual Nembhard, D.A., Osothsilp, N., 2001. An empirical comparison

operations. Journal of Industrial Engineering 18, 4247. of forgetting models. IEEE Transactions on Engineering

Hoffman, T.R., 1968. Effects of prior experience on learning curve Management 48, 283291.

parameters. Journal of Industrial Engineering 19, 412413. Nembhard, D.A., Uzumeri, M.V., 2000. Experiential learning

Keachie, E.C., Fontana, R.J., 1966. Production lot sizing under a and forgetting for manual and cognitive tasks. International

learning effect. Management Science 13, B102B108. Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 25, 315326.

Jaber, M.Y., Bonney, M., 1996. Production breaks and the Salamah, M.K., Abdul-Malak, M.U., Jaber, M.Y., 1993.

learning curve: The forgetting phenomenon. Applied Math- Mathematical modelling of the effect of human learning in

ematical Modelling 20, 162169. the nite production inventory model. Applied Mathematical

Jaber, M.Y., Bonney, M., 1997. A comparative study of learning Modelling 17, 613615.

curves with forgetting. Applied Mathematical Modelling 21, Sikstrom, S., Jaber, M.Y., 2002. The power integration diffusion

523531. (PID) model for production breaks. Journal of Experimental

Jaber, M.Y., Bonney, M., 1997. The effect of learning and Psychology: Applied 8, 118126.

forgetting on the economic manufactured quantity (EMQ) Spradlin, B., Pierce, D., 1967. Production scheduling under

with consideration of intracycle backorders. International learning effect by dynamic programming. The Journal of

Journal of Production Economics 53, 111. Industrial Engineering 18, 219222.

Jaber, M.Y., Bonney, M., 1998. The effect of learning and Steedman, I., 1970. Some improvement curve theory. Interna-

forgetting on the optimal lot size quantity of intermittent tional Journal of Production Research 8, 189205.

production runs. Production Planning and Control 9, 2027. Sule, D.R., 1978. The effect of alternate periods of learning and

Jaber, M.Y., Bonney, M., 1999. The economic manufactured / forgetting on economic manufactured quantity. AIIE Trans-

order quantity (EMQ/EOQ) and the learning curve: Past, actions 10, 338343.

present and future. International Journal of Production Wortham, A.W., Mayyasi, A.M., 1972. Learning considera-

Economics 59, 93102. tions with economic order quantity. AIIE Transactions 4,

Jaber, M.Y., Kher, H.V., 2002. The dual-phase learningforget- 6971.

ting model. International Journal of Production Economics Wright, T., 1936. Factors affecting the cost of airplanes. Journal

76, 229242. of Aeronautical Science 3, 122128.

- Article 3_Joint Optimal Inventory Control and Preventive Maintenance PolicyDiunggah olehTunENSTAB
- Financial Viability of Advancing Payment for Contract Growers of Groundnut SeedDiunggah olehNavaneetharajah Vithyarajan
- mbb-bok.pdfDiunggah olehpresidentofasia
- SSRN-id2187229Diunggah olehAndra Somodung
- 22Chapter14 (1)Diunggah olehali
- Vol No Paper 6Diunggah olehMagaTIME
- PM & IR SyllabusDiunggah olehTania RoyChowdhury
- Machine Learning ObservationsDiunggah olehChandanYadav
- YMS Ch4: More on Two-Variable Data AP Statistics at LSHS Mr. MoleskyDiunggah olehInTerp0ol
- Depth vs BreathDiunggah olehVadim
- Current and Probable Past Wildlife Fatality Hotspots on the Thousand Islands Parkway, Ontario, CanadaDiunggah olehGRUNDOPUNK
- Multiple Response Surface MethodsDiunggah olehIRFAN AHANGER
- Syllabus StatInfKIDiunggah olehdwarrel
- Lecture 01Diunggah olehnarendra
- MoD ThesisDiunggah olehravsree
- Common pitfalls in statistical analysis: Linear regression analysisDiunggah olehSillyBee1205
- EMTSession4Forecasting.pptDiunggah olehnoreen sultan
- Cervical Cancer Vaccine - Eco No Metrics ProjectDiunggah olehOana Caz
- [John H. Aldrich, Forrest D. Nelson] Linear Probab(BookZZ.org)Diunggah olehRicardo Restrepo
- Chapter 7 - Multiple RegressionDiunggah olehIdhaniv
- Final Exam Question Bum2413 Applied StatisticsDiunggah olehSyafiq MT
- WOODSetal_1986_statistics.pdfDiunggah olehMoniqueAmaral
- UsefulStataCommands.pdfDiunggah olehsannuk72581
- Linear Regression AnalysisDiunggah olehmak111111
- Innovation in SMEs - An Empirical Investigation.pdfDiunggah olehMce Reg
- Useful Stat a CommandsDiunggah olehMaliha Jahan
- Introduction to Coordinate Systems and Projections - Instructional Guide.pdfDiunggah olehAnonymous jvaG8m7
- Mossa va Cardak (2006)Diunggah olehquoc huong
- Local KMS activation server for Windows 7, Windows 8 Professional and Enterprise, Office 2Diunggah olehVimukthi Twk
- Chrie Outback Final 03Diunggah olehdurgaselvam

- System Design PresentationenDiunggah olehVaibhav Chaudhary
- 2007_Ferguson, Jayaraman, Souza_European Journal of Operational Research_Note an Application of the EOQ Model With Nonlinear Holding CosDiunggah olehVaibhav Chaudhary
- How to Use KeygenDiunggah olehsolquiha
- How to Use KeygenDiunggah olehsolquiha
- Air Disc BrakesDiunggah olehArijeet Sen
- SpaceX Hyperloop Pod Competition 2018 (1)Diunggah olehVaibhav Chaudhary
- Alcoa Recoil CatalogDiunggah olehVaibhav Chaudhary
- 93818_222MSENDiunggah olehVaibhav Chaudhary
- Needle Roller Bearings With Machined Rings With an Inner Ring-NKI 17%2F20Diunggah olehVaibhav Chaudhary
- 2007_Foul, Djemili, Tadj_Nonlinear Analysis Hybrid Systems_Optimal and Self-tuning Optimal Control of a Periodic-review Hybrid ProductioDiunggah olehVaibhav Chaudhary
- High Temperature Grease St Kool 595Diunggah olehVaibhav Chaudhary
- 2007_Dye, Ouyang, Hsieh_Computers & Industrial Engineering_Inventory and Pricing Strategies for Deteriorating Items With Shortages a DisDiunggah olehVaibhav Chaudhary
- SSAF_PACDiunggah olehVaibhav Chaudhary
- 2007_journal, Collection_unknown_an Eoq Model With Generalized Ramp-type Demand and Weibull DistributionDiunggah olehVaibhav Chaudhary
- 2007_Gong Et Al._new Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research_Improved Two‐Grade Delayed Particle Swarm Optimisation (TGDPSO) for InventDiunggah olehVaibhav Chaudhary
- 2007_Chen, Chen_Transportation Research Part E Logistics and Transportation Review_The Profit-maximization Model for a Multi-item DistriDiunggah olehVaibhav Chaudhary
- 2007_Das, Maiti_Applied Mathematics and Computation_An Application of Bi-level Newsboy Problem in Two Substitutable Items Under CapitalDiunggah olehVaibhav Chaudhary
- 1997_Chakrabarti, Chaudhuri_International Journal of Production Economics_An EOQ Model for Deteriorating Items With a Linear Trend in DeDiunggah olehVaibhav Chaudhary
- 1997_Chakrabarti, Chaudhuri_International Journal of Production Economics_An EOQ Model for Deteriorating Items With a Linear Trend in DeDiunggah olehVaibhav Chaudhary
- 2007_Benkherouf_European Journal of Operational Research_On a Stochastic Inventory Model With a Generalized Holding CostsDiunggah olehVaibhav Chaudhary
- 2007_Akkerman, Van Donk_International Journal of Production Economics_Product Prioritization in a Two-stage Food Production System WithDiunggah olehVaibhav Chaudhary
- 1997_GIRI, CHAUDHURI_International Journal of Systems Science_Heuristic Models for Deteriorating Items With Shortages and Time-Varying dDiunggah olehVaibhav Chaudhary
- 2007_Chung, Huang_International Journal of Production Economics_The Optimal Retailer's Ordering Policies for Deteriorating Items With LiDiunggah olehVaibhav Chaudhary
- 1997_Comp, Mandal_Unknown_WITH ALTERNATING DEMAND RATES.pdfDiunggah olehVaibhav Chaudhary
- 2007_Al-Khedhairi, Tadj_Applied Mathematical Sciences_Optimal Control of a Production Inventory System With Weibull Distributed DeteriorDiunggah olehVaibhav Chaudhary
- 1985_Pasternack_Marketing Science_Optimal Pricing and Return Policies for Perishable CommoditiesDiunggah olehVaibhav Chaudhary
- 2007_Bao, Lee, Lee_OR Spectrum_The Value of Electronic Marketplace in a Perishable Product Inventory System With Auto-correlated DemandDiunggah olehVaibhav Chaudhary
- 2007_Bao, Lee, Lee_OR Spectrum_The Value of Electronic Marketplace in a Perishable Product Inventory System With Auto-correlated DemandDiunggah olehVaibhav Chaudhary
- 1997_Slzing, For, Items_Unknown_~ OehTDiunggah olehVaibhav Chaudhary

- mae320hw04solDiunggah olehEvan Durst
- Ch4 Angles and DirectionsDiunggah olehAri Calm
- p40a-spec-PS24VDCDiunggah olehRamtel
- Computational and Data Grids Principles, Applications, and Design 1613501137Diunggah olehnkprv
- SV9100 Quick Reference GuideDiunggah olehdbhirud
- Ensamblaje Mule 4010Diunggah olehMiguel Robles
- Thesis - Risk Assesement for Demolition WorksDiunggah olehAhmad Firdaus
- Flight Stability and Automatic Control Second Edition Robert C. NelsonDiunggah olehபிரகதீஸ்வரன் தமிழன்
- Perdana, Licentiate ThesisDiunggah olehanon-17446
- Norstar Plus Meridian Nortel PBX Manual Install Guide 4.0Diunggah olehpquesnel3
- Gulp SuccinctlyDiunggah olehputolov
- Midwest High-Speed Rail Supply ChainDiunggah olehZoe Galland
- SATR-A-2005 Calibration Test Report-Temperature Recorder.pdfDiunggah olehsfsd
- Frequency Domain Equalization for PCC-OfDMDiunggah olehkharboutly
- Restricted Earth Fault Protection of TransformerDiunggah olehkarthik
- DPS Worksheet C01(Teacher)Diunggah olehRegie Sacil Espiña
- computerized governanceDiunggah olehViritha Reddy
- System Administrator Guide OBIEE11gDiunggah olehpardhuin
- 210 MW PowerplantDiunggah olehPratik Makwana
- Paper_Geosynthetics_Evaluation of The Effect of Synthetic Fibers and Non Woven Geotextile.pdfDiunggah olehEka Nur Fitriani
- 1-s2.0-S2211339812000391-mainDiunggah olehttugce29
- Transformers ConnectionsDiunggah olehgeorgel1980
- Nutanix Pi Case StudyDiunggah olehDemodx Demodxz
- Misinterpretations of Bernoullis Law 2011 InternetDiunggah olehzaza
- HPHT Drilling ResearchDiunggah olehVikram Sai
- Transformation_ Transfer Function ↔ State SpaceDiunggah olehAbinesh Tr
- Osram CatálogoDiunggah olehMarcos M. Castilho
- asc_timetables_en_P1Diunggah olehionutconstantin2011
- Path Follower RobotDiunggah olehAnuj Tripathi
- Cooper RetrofitDiunggah olehAlexander Checya