Production Process Optimization and Defective Rate Control Based on Adaptive Sequential Detection and Monte Carlo Tree Search

Authors

  • Qizhuo Lei
  • Qiyu Lei

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54097/jhw3q658

Keywords:

Adaptive Sequential Detection, Monte Carlo Tree Search, Inspection Costs, Production Quality Control, Supply Chain Management.

Abstract

With the increasing globalization and complexity of supply chains, modern manufacturing faces challenges in ensuring product quality while minimizing inspection costs. Companies must balance the need for reliable components from diverse suppliers with the risks of defective parts that could disrupt production. Traditional sampling methods often lack flexibility, leading to inefficiencies in defect detection. To address these challenges, this study integrates adaptive sequential detection with Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS) to optimize production processes. The adaptive detection approach adjusts sample sizes dynamically, ensuring defective parts are rejected with 95% confidence or accepted with 90% confidence, maintaining precision while controlling costs. When the defective rate nears 0.11, the method requires up to 155 samples for accurate decisions. MCTS further enhances decision-making by simulating multiple production strategies and identifying the optimal path, balancing inspection costs with quality control. Among the six tested scenarios, the best-case strategy achieved an expected return of 47.2 units, highlighting the model’s effectiveness. This framework provides a practical solution for manufacturers to improve decision-making under uncertain conditions and can be extended to multi-stage production lines, offering valuable insights for addressing supply chain disruptions and complex operational challenges.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

[1] Guo, Y., Wang, H., & Zhang, T. Adaptive inspection model for defective product detection using Bayesian inference [J]. Journal of Manufacturing Systems, 2021, 61: 55 - 64.

[2] Lee, J., & Park, K. Optimization of production scheduling in the presence of defective rates using machine learning models [J]. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, 2020, 16 (7): 4205 - 4214.

[3] Lin, F., Wang, S., & Wu, H. Sequential sampling for defective rate control in uncertain environments [J]. Computers & Operations Research, 2021, 135: 105438.

[4] Zhang, C., & Hu, J. Adaptive quality control with cost optimization in the manufacturing process [J]. International Journal of Production Research, 2020, 58 (10): 3048 - 3062.

[5] Zhao, T., & Liu, H. A hybrid intelligent algorithm for dynamic quality control [J]. Expert Systems with Applications, 2021, 165: 113863.

[6] Liu, Y., Zhao, W., & Yang, R. A real-time defect detection system using adaptive sequential algorithms [J]. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 2023, 34 (5): 1509 - 1523.

[7] Park, S., & Kim, J. Quality management and defective rate analysis in global supply chains [J]. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 2019, 55 (2): 120 - 132.

[8] Chen, M., Tang, Z., & Li, X. Multi-stage quality control strategy with dynamic programming [J]. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 2022, 167: 107984.

[9] Xiao, Y., & Dong, L. Optimization of defect management strategies using MCTS [J]. Applied Soft Computing, 2023, 144: 109135.

[10] He, Z., & Fang, X. Balancing defective rates and inspection costs in quality management systems [J]. Production Planning & Control, 2022, 33 (12): 1094 - 1107.

[11] Sun, P., & Zhou, Y. Application of Monte Carlo tree search in automated production systems [J]. IEEE Transactions on Automation Science and Engineering, 2023, 20 (3): 2451 - 2460.

[12] Wu, Q., Zhou, Z., & Fan, X. Decision-making in production processes using sequential Monte Carlo simulations [J]. Journal of Manufacturing Processes, 2020, 49: 230 - 241.

Downloads

Published

27-02-2025

How to Cite

Lei, Q., & Lei, Q. (2025). Production Process Optimization and Defective Rate Control Based on Adaptive Sequential Detection and Monte Carlo Tree Search. Highlights in Business, Economics and Management, 51, 271-277. https://doi.org/10.54097/jhw3q658