An Architecture of Computer Aided Process Planning System Integrated with Scheduling Using Decision Support System

Process planning and scheduling are two major plann in g and control activities that consume significant part of the lead-time, theref ore all attempts are being made to reduce lead-time by automating them. Compute r Aided Process Planning (CAPP) is a step in this direction. Most of the existin g CAPP systems do not consider scheduling while generating a process plan. Sched uling is done separately after the process plan has been generated and therefore , it is possible that a process plan so generated is either not optimal or feasi ble from scheduling point of view. As process plans are generated without consid eration of job shop status, many problems arise within the manufacturing environ ment. Investigations have shown that 20%～30% of all process plans generated are not valid and have to be altered or suffer production delays when production sta rts. There is thus a major need for integration of scheduling with computer aide d process planning for generating more realistic process plans. In doing so, eff iciency of the manufacturing system as a whole is expected to improve. Decision support system performs many functions such as selection of machine too ls, cutting tools, sequencing of operations, determination of optimum cutting pa rameters and checking availability of machine tool before allocating any operati on to a machine tool. The process of transforming component data, process capabi lity and decision rules into computer readable format is still a major obstacle. This paper proposes architecture of a system, which integrates computer aided p rocess-planning system with scheduling using decision support system. A decisio n support system can be defined as " an interactive system that provides the use rs with easy access to decision models in order to support semi-structured or u nstructured decision making tasks".

Opinion: the use of natural hazard modeling for decision making under uncertainty

Decision making to mitigate the effects of natural hazards is a complex undertaking fraught with uncertainty. Models to describe risks associated with natural hazards have proliferated in recent years. Concurrently, there is a growing body of work focused on developing best practices for natural hazard modeling and to create structured evaluation criteria for complex environmental models. However, to our knowledge there has been less focus on the conditions where decision makers can confidently rely on results from these models. In this review we propose a preliminary set of conditions necessary for the appropriate application of modeled results to natural hazard decision making and provide relevant examples within US wildfire management programs.

A Conceptually-Based Empirical Analysis on Quality Differences Between UK Annual Reports and US 10-K Reports

The International Accounting Standards Board （IASB） and the Financial Accounting Standards Board （FASB） stress the importance of high-quality ＇financial reports. From a scientific point of view, however, major methodological drawbacks can arise when trying to arrive at a comprehensive assessment and evaluation of the decision usefulness of financial reports. In this conceptually-based exploratory study, the authors construct a 33-item index aimed at operationalizing decision usefulness in terms of the fundamental and enhancing qualitative characteristics laid out in the conceptual framework （CF） of the IASB （2010）. Using a matched-pairs sample design, which includes 70 UK annual reports and 70 US 10-K reports for 2010, the results of test-retest and inter-rater reliability tests show that these multiple items, which were based on items used in previous research, can be measured in a reliable manner. At the same time, the results of an exploratory factor analysis indicate that the IASB qualitative characteristics cannot be measured separately when the 33-item index is applied. At an aggregate level, the results of paired-sample t-tests reveal that UK reports score on average higher than US 10-K reports, which suggests that the overall quality of UK reports is better. The findings of this study add to the existing literature on the empirical evaluation of the effects of international accounting standards, showing that, as compared with 10-K reports, UK annual reports provide more information on topics such as corporate social responsibility （CSR）, corporate governance, and annual bonus schemes. On the other hand, US reports outperform UK reports with respect to the content of fair value information, cash flow statements, off-balance financing, and audit reporting.