4.5 Article

Utility modelling, equilibrium, and coordination of resource service transaction in service-oriented manufacturing system

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/0954405412438011

关键词

Service-oriented manufacturing; resource service transaction chain; utility modelling; utility equilibrium; utility coordination; service-oriented technology

资金

  1. NSFC (National Science Foundation of China) [51005012]
  2. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities in China
  3. National Hi-Tech R&D1283 (863) Program in China [2011AA04 0501]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The resource service transaction in service-oriented manufacturing systems is one of the key issues in deciding its practical implementation and application. In order to enhance the benefit of the three sides or users (i.e. resource service provider, resource service demander, and resource service agent or operator (agent)) using service-oriented manufacturing systems, the comprehensive utility models consider the revenue, time, and reliability for the three sides in the resource service-transaction process faced with uncertain factors under decentralized decision-making conditions are established first. Then the related comprehensive utility model for the resource service transaction chain of 'multiple resource service providers - one agent - multiple resource service demanders' under a centralized decision-making condition is proposed and discussed. The existence of utility equilibrium between resource service provider and agent is studied and proved. As is the optimal decision of a resource service transaction chain under the decentralized decision-making condition, as well as the utility equilibrium between agent and resource service demander. A utility coordination method is proposed, with the aim of improving the comprehensive utility of the resource service transaction chain under a decentralized decision-making condition. The case study illustrates that the proposed approach is practicable and effective.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据