The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Optimal Lot Sizing, Process Quality Improvement and Setup Cost Reduction
Abstract
This paper seeks to demonstrate that lower setup costs can benefit production systems by improving quality control. It does so by introducing a simple model that captures a significant relationship between quality and lot size: while producing a lot, the process can go "out of control" with a given probability each time it produces another item. Once out of control, the process produces defective units throughout its production of the current lot. The system incurs an extra cost for rework and related operations for each defective piece that it produces. Thus, there is an incentive to produce smaller lots, and have a smaller fraction of defective units. The paper also introduces three options for investing in quality improvements: (i) reducing the probability that the process moves out of control (which yields fewer defects, larger lot sizes, fewer setups, and larger holding costs); (ii) reducing setup costs (which yields smaller lot sizes, lower holding costs, and fewer defects); and (iii) simultaneously using the two previous options. By assuming a specific form of the investment cost function for each option, we explicitly obtain the optimal investment strategy. We also briefly discuss the sensitivity of these solutions to changes in underlying parameter values. A numerical example illustrates the results.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Ireson, W. G., & Juran, J. M. (1952) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.2307/2280757 · Cited by 2,849
Feigenbaum, A. V. (1961) · Cited by 1,551
Gryna, F. M. (1970) · Cited by 904
Japanese manufacturing techniques
(1983) · Business Horizons · doi:10.1016/0007-6813(83)90111-8 · Cited by 782
Monahan, G. E. (1982) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.28.1.1 · Cited by 745
A Bayes Approach to a Quality Control Model
Girshick, M. A., & Rubin, H. (1952) · The Annals of Mathematical Statistics · doi:10.1214/aoms/1177729489 · Cited by 366
Cited by
Economic production quantity model for items with imperfect quality
Salameh, M. K., & Jaber, M. Y. (2000) · International Journal of Production Economics · doi:10.1016/s0925-5273(99)00044-4 · Cited by 1,048
The single-period (news-vendor) problem: literature review and suggestions for future research
Khouja, M. (1999) · Omega · doi:10.1016/s0305-0483(99)00017-1 · Cited by 908
CHENG, T. C. E. (1991) · IIE Transactions · doi:10.1080/07408179108963838 · Cited by 287
Dynamic model for a defective production system with Poka-Yoke
Tsou, J.-C., & Chen, J.-M. (2005) · Journal of the Operational Research Society · doi:10.1057/palgrave.jors.2601877 · Cited by 32
Kristianto, Y., Helo, P., & Takala, J. (2011) · International Journal of Operational Research · doi:10.1504/ijor.2011.037264 · Cited by 11
Metadata
- Authors
- Porteus, E. L.
- Venue
- Operations Research
- Published
- 1986-02
- Volume
- 34
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 137-144
- ISSN
- 0030-364X (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5463
- OpenAlex
- W2158182297
- Cited by
- 1,158
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 16.86
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Optimal Lot Sizing, Process Quality Improvement and Setup Cost Reduction. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1287/opre.34.1.137
- The paper
- Porteus, E. L. (1986). Optimal Lot Sizing, Process Quality Improvement and Setup Cost Reduction. Operations Research. https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.34.1.137
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.