Enhancing Obsolescence Forecasting with Deep Generative Data Augmentation: A Semi-Supervised Framework for Low-Data Industrial Applications

Claude Baron; Elie Saad; Marc Zolghadri; Mariem Besbes; Victor Czmil; Vincent Bourgeois

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 58 references

Enhancing Obsolescence Forecasting with Deep Generative Data Augmentation: A Semi-Supervised Framework for Low-Data Industrial Applications

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The paper claims a two-stage pipeline—deep generative data augmentation plus a cluster-based semi-supervised pseudo-labeling algorithm—pushes random-forest obsolescence forecasting to 0.9836 accuracy on system-level data and 0.9679 on…

desk verdict A worthwhile application of data augmentation to obsolescence forecasting whose headline accuracy gains are not credible as written because the generators appear to be trained on the entire dataset, not nested inside the cross-validation folds. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.01261 v1 pith:DLG4LFIX submitted 2025-05-02 cs.LG cs.AI

Elie Saad , Mariem Besbes , Marc Zolghadri , Victor Czmil , Claude Baron , Vincent Bourgeois This is my paper · ORCID

classification cs.LGcs.AI

keywords obsolescenceforecastingdeepgenerativemodelssemi-supervisedlearningdataaugmentationtabulargenerationself-trainingrandomforestlow-dataindustrialapplications

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Obsolescence forecasting for long-lived industrial systems is data-starved, and the paper claims that shortage can be overcome by generating synthetic component records and training classical classifiers on them. The proposed pipeline first compresses real labeled cases with an autoencoder, synthesizes new cases with a deep generative model (Real NVP, TVAE, or CTGAN), then uses a new self-training semi-supervised algorithm to give the synthetic cases labels and retrain a Random Forest on the combined data. On the two public benchmark datasets, the framework reaches 0.9836 accuracy at system level and 0.9679 at component level, beating the best published baseline by 5 to 7 percentage points. The central idea is that data quantity, not model architecture, is the limiting factor, and generative augmentation plus pseudo-labeling can supply the missing quantity.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is a cluster-based self-training semi-supervised algorithm. It scales the combined real-plus-generated data, partitions it into $\kappa$ clusters by K-Means with $\kappa = \lfloor (N_L + N_U)/\alpha \rfloor$, and inside each cluster either propagates the single observed class to unlabeled points or trains a cluster-specific Random Forest to pseudo-label them; a final Random Forest is then trained on all points that received labels. This is what lets the discriminator absorb synthetic examples whose true labels are unknown. Around this sits an autoencoder for invertible dimensionality reduction, which keeps generated records human-legible when mapped back to the original feature space, and a deep generative model (Real NVP, TVAE, or CTGAN) that supplies the extra cases.

What would settle it

Re-run the pipeline with the autoencoder and generator fitted separately inside each training fold, or inspect the public code to see whether they were; if GSM Arena accuracy drops below the reported 0.9836 or the gap to the baseline disappears, the claimed benefit comes from leakage rather than augmentation.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that a two-step framework—deep generative data augmentation followed by a dedicated semi-supervised self-training routine—makes classical machine-learning obsolescence forecasting reach state-of-the-art accuracy in low-data conditions. In the authors' experiments the best configuration uses Real NVP as the generator and a Random Forest as the discriminator, achieving 0.9836 accuracy on the GSM Arena system-level dataset and 0.9679 on the Arrow component-level dataset, outperforming the strongest prior method by 5 to 7 percentage points. The paper describes this as reaching the theoretical limit of the underlying Random Forest on these benchmarks. The framework is explicitly model-agnostic: the generator and the classifier are decoupled, so the same augmentation and pseudo-labeling recipe could be attached to any supervised model.

Load-bearing premise

The accuracy gains assume the generative model and autoencoder are trained only on the training portion of each cross-validation split; the paper never states this, and if they are trained on the full dataset, the synthetic data can carry information from the test folds, making the reported margin unreliable.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

If the framework is right, obsolescence forecasting no longer has to wait for large labeled histories; a few hundred real cases plus generated ones can outperform models trained on the original data alone.
Classical, interpretable models such as Random Forest can be retained in industrial practice while gaining most of the accuracy advantage normally associated with deep learning.
The 5–7 percentage point gain is concentrated on the small, imbalanced GSM Arena dataset, implying the method helps most precisely where data scarcity is worst.
The empirical comparison suggests generator choice matters: Real NVP produced the best forecasting accuracy on both datasets even though other generators won individual statistical-fidelity metrics.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

If the framework is leak-free, the same pseudo-labeling-plus-augmentation recipe should transfer to other low-data tabular classification problems, such as equipment failure or credit risk; the paper does not claim this extension.
Because the Kolmogorov–Smirnov tests show the synthetic distributions differ significantly from the real ones, the framework's value may lie more in the semi-supervised label propagation than in generative fidelity; a direct comparison against simple resampling or SMOTE would test this.
The 'theoretical limit' remark implies the feature set, not the model, is the bottleneck; adding time-to-obsolescence or lifecycle features would be the natural stress test of that claim.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Here's the short version: this is a sensible use of known generative-model components (Real NVP, TVAE, CTGAN) plus a cluster-based self-training loop to tackle a genuinely practical low-data problem in obsolescence forecasting. The combination is new to this subfield, the paper ships code and data, and the write-up is aimed squarely at practitioners. That part is good.

The main issue is the evaluation protocol, and it is load-bearing. Algorithm 1 takes the entire labeled set L, trains the autoencoder and generator on all of it, and only later does the manuscript mention stratified 5-fold cross-validation for the classifier in Appendix E. Nothing in the paper says the generators are refit inside each fold. If they are fit on the full dataset, synthetic samples can sit near test-fold points, and the self-training loop can effectively label those points to match the test distribution. In that case the reported 5–7% gains over Trabelsi et al. are not evidence for the framework, and the conclusion that the method is 'reaching the theoretical limit' is an overstatement. The authors need to show a nested protocol—train autoencoder and generator on the training fold only, generate, then train the RF—and the confusion should be resolvable from the provided code, so this is a fixable flaw, not a fatal one.

There are also smaller inconsistencies: Table 3 lists Arrow N0=3500 while Section 5 says 2500; Table 7 does not report the Trabelsi baseline on Arrow; and a few typos (e.g., 'Arrow counts' in the pseudocode). None of these sink the paper, but they add to the impression that the empirical section was not carefully checked.

Who is this for? Anyone doing low-data tabular classification in maintenance or lifecycle management, and specifically the obsolescence-forecasting community, where public benchmarks are rare. The paper is worth engaging because the framework is plausible and the authors made the extra effort to share code and data. I would not trust the headline numbers until the leakage question is settled, but I would send it to peer review with a clear request for a leakage-free re-run. If the numbers survive nested cross-validation, this becomes a solid applied contribution.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a framework for obsolescence forecasting under data scarcity. The framework first reduces the dimensionality of labeled data with an autoencoder, then trains one of three deep generative models (CTGAN, TVAE, Real NVP) on the reduced data, synthesizes unlabeled samples, pseudo-labels them with a novel cluster-based semi-supervised learning algorithm, and finally trains a Random Forest classifier on the augmented, pseudo-labeled set. The authors report state-of-the-art accuracy on two datasets: 0.9836 on GSM Arena and 0.9679 on Arrow with Real NVP, outperforming the Trabelsi et al. baseline by 5--7%. The paper includes public code and datasets, detailed generative-model comparisons, and appendices on computational cost, convergence, and evaluation metrics.

Significance. If the reported gains are valid, the framework is a useful contribution to a practical industrial problem where labeled data are scarce, and the public release of code and data supports reproducibility. The paper also provides a broad comparison of three tabular generative models with multiple statistical and model-based metrics, which is informative for practitioners. However, the central empirical claim rests on an evaluation protocol whose leakage-freeness is not established: Algorithm 1 trains the autoencoder and generator on the entire labeled set, and the paper does not state that they are refit inside each cross-validation fold. Given this unresolved point, the headline numbers cannot currently be trusted as evidence of the framework's superiority.

major comments (4)

[Algorithm 1; Section 4.4; Appendix E]
[Section 5, Table 3]
[Section 7, Conclusion]
[Sections 3.3 and 4.4]

minor comments (4)

[Appendix B, Equation (B.5)]
[Section 4.1 and Section 6.1]
[Section 6.3]
[Table 7]

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the framework is self-referential by design (self-training on self-generated data), but no prediction reduces to a fitted input by construction; the main risk is potential train/test leakage, which is an evaluation-validity concern, not circularity.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is: train an autoencoder on L, train a generator on the reduced L′, synthesize U′, pseudo-label U′ with a classifier trained on L′∪U′, and finally train a Random Forest on L∪U. This is a genuine self-training loop, and the paper explicitly labels it as such (Section 3.3, 'Self-training... iteratively uses its own predictions on unlabeled data to improve the model [41]'). Self-training on self-generated data is not circular in the sense of this review: the reported accuracies in Table 7 are compared against an external baseline (Trabelsi et al. [16]) and Appendix E states that stratified 5-fold cross-validation is used for evaluation, so the final metric is not defined to be equal to a fitted parameter. No equation defines the predicted labels as the fitted parameters, and no fitted quantity is renamed as a prediction. The citations to the authors' own prior work (Zolghadri et al. [5,7], Trabelsi et al. [16], Saad [52]) are used for domain definitions, dataset provenance, and as a benchmark; they are not the load-bearing justification for the framework's claims. The substantive weakness is a potential evaluation leak: Algorithm 1 trains rψ and gθ on the full labeled set without showing a data split before the classifier CV, so if the code does not split before generator training, synthetic data could carry test-fold information. That is a correctness/reproducibility risk, not a circular derivation, and cannot be confirmed from the text alone. Hence score 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The framework's performance rests on several assumptions about the data and the generative models: that the autoencoder preserves enough information, that the generative models can synthesize realistic tabular data, and that cluster-based pseudo-labeling is accurate. The paper tests the generative quality but the KS tests reject distributional equality, so the central mechanism is partially unsupported. The adjustable alpha and the latent dimension are free parameters.

free parameters (4)

alpha (cluster count divisor) = not specified
Algorithm 2 defines kappa = floor((NL+NU)/alpha) with 'alpha an adjustable parameter'; its value is never given, and Appendix E contradicts it by tuning K-Means with cluster counts 2-5.
latent dimension m = 1 for Arrow, 2 for GSM Arena
Selected via TOPSIS over latent dimensions 1..n; this is a model choice fitted to each dataset, not a fixed constant.
Isolation Forest contamination rate = 0.05
Used for outlier removal in the semi-supervised pipeline; chosen as a conservative assumption.
K-Means cluster count range = 2 to 5
Appendix E tunes cluster counts between 2 and 5 via silhouette scores, which conflicts with the dynamic kappa formula in Algorithm 2.

assumptions (4)

domain assumption Obsolescence forecasting is a binary classification problem on tabular data with features like dimensions, voltage, and packaging.
The framework and evaluation are built for binary available/obsolete labels on tabular feature vectors (Sections 3 and 5).
domain assumption The autoencoder reduction r_psi is invertible and information-preserving.
Section 3.2 states the framework relies on the assumptions of information preservation and invertibility to reconstruct generated data for human legibility.
domain assumption Deep generative models trained on L' can produce synthetic data from the same distribution as the real obsolescence data.
The framework's benefit depends on this; the paper's own KS tests reject distributional equality (D values exceed thresholds, Section 6.2), so this assumption is empirically questionable.
ad hoc to paper Cluster-based label propagation in Algorithm 2 yields correct labels for synthetic points.
The algorithm assigns a single class to all unlabeled points in a cluster if the labeled subset is homogeneous, which can propagate errors; this is a key mechanism of the proposed method.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Enhancing Obsolescence Forecasting with Deep Generative Data Augmentation: A Semi-Supervised Framework for Low-Data Industrial Applications." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/DLG4LFIX

@misc{pith2026250501261,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Enhancing Obsolescence Forecasting with Deep Generative Data Augmentation: A Semi-Supervised Framework for Low-Data Industrial Applications},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/DLG4LFIX}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.01261}
}

read the original abstract

The challenge of electronic component obsolescence is particularly critical in systems with long life cycles. Various obsolescence management methods are employed to mitigate its impact, with obsolescence forecasting being a highly sought-after and prominent approach. As a result, numerous machine learning-based forecasting methods have been proposed. However, machine learning models require a substantial amount of relevant data to achieve high precision, which is lacking in the current obsolescence landscape in some situations. This work introduces a novel framework for obsolescence forecasting based on deep learning. The proposed framework solves the lack of available data through deep generative modeling, where new obsolescence cases are generated and used to augment the training dataset. The augmented dataset is then used to train a classical machine learning-based obsolescence forecasting model. To train classical forecasting models using augmented datasets, existing classical supervised-learning classifiers are adapted for semi-supervised learning within this framework. The proposed framework demonstrates state-of-the-art results on benchmarking datasets.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.01261 by the authors.

**Figure 1.** Visualization of the dataset D with its various components. An ill-posed inverse problem as described by Duff et al. [35], is a problem that is solved by finding the best solution for which the forward analysis matches the desired output. Thus, the ill-posed inverse problem of predicting the state of components and systems is resolved using a parametric model denoted as a function f that estimates the target given a… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

58 extracted references · 52 canonical work pages

[1]

D. S. P . O. DoD, Diminishing Manufacturing Sources and Ma terial Shortages A Guidebook of Best Practices for Implemen ting a Robust DMSMS Management Program, United States Department of Defe nse, 2022. 26

work page 2022
[2]

Trabelsi, M

I. Trabelsi, M. Zolghadri, B. Zeddini, M. Barkallah, M. H addar, Prediction of obsolescence degree as a function of ti me: A mathematical formulation, Computers in Industry 129 (2021) 103470

work page 2021
[3]

F. J. R. Rojo, P . Baguley, N. Shaikh, R. Roy, S. Kelly, Tomc at: An obsolescence management capability assessment fram e- work, Journal of Physics: Conference Series 364 (2012) 0120 98. URL: https://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/364/1/012098. doi:10.1088/1742-6596/364/1/012098

work page doi:10.1088/1742-6596/364/1/012098 2012
[4]

IEC 62402:2019, Obsolescence management, Standard, In ternational Electrotechnical Commission, Geneva, CH, 201 9

work page 2019
[5]

Zolghadri, M

M. Zolghadri, M. Besbes, V . Bourgeois, E. Saad, Micro-el ectronic chips shortages and obsolescence: an empirical st udy, Procedia CIRP 120 (2023) 1570–1575

work page 2023
[6]

M. A. Mellal, Obsolescence–a review of the literature, T echnology in Society 63 (2020) 101347

work page 2020
[7]

Zolghadri, S.-A

M. Zolghadri, S.-A. Addouche, C. Baron, A. Soltan, K. Boi ssie, Obsolescence, rarefaction and their propagation, Re search in Engineering Design 32 (2021) 451–468

work page 2021
[8]

´Zróbek, Remarks about methods of recognizing types of depre ciation and obsolescence, Studia i Materiały Towarzystwa N aukowego Nieruchomo´sci (2011) 65–72

R. ´Zróbek, Remarks about methods of recognizing types of depre ciation and obsolescence, Studia i Materiały Towarzystwa N aukowego Nieruchomo´sci (2011) 65–72

work page 2011

Show all 58 references

[9]

T. E. Butt, M. Camilleri, P . Paul, K. A. Jones, Obsolescen ce types and the built environment - deﬁnitions and implicat ions, International Journal of Environment and Sustainable Development 14 (201 5) 20
[10]

R. M. Rust, A. Elshennawy, L. Rabelo, A literature revie w on mitigation strategies for electrical component obsole scence in military-based systems, South African Journal of Industrial Engineering 3 3 (2022) 25–38

2022
[11]

Jenab, K

K. Jenab, K. Noori, P . D. Weinsier, Obsolescence manage ment in rail signalling systems: concept and markovian mode lling, International Journal of Productivity and Quality Management 14 (2014) 21 –35

2014
[12]

E. D. Francesco, R. D. Francesco, F. Leccese, Use of the a sd s3000l for the optimization of projects in order to reduce the risk of obsolescence of complex systems, 2019 IEEE 5th International Workshop on Metrology for AeroSpace (MetroAeroSpace) (2019) 233–237

2019
[13]

A. P . Riascos, J. Wang-Michelitsch, T. Michelitsch, Ag ing in transport processes on networks with stochastic cumu lative damage, Physical Review E 100 (2019) 022312

2019
[14]

Tchuente, J

D. Tchuente, J. Lonlac, B. Kamsu-Foguem, A methodologi cal and theoretical framework for implementing explainabl e artiﬁcial intelligence (xai) in business applications, Computers in Industry 155 ( 2024) 104044

2024
[15]

Culot, M

G. Culot, M. Podrecca, G. Nassimbeni, Artiﬁcial intell igence in supply chain management: A systematic literature review of empirical studies and research directions, Computers in Industry 162 (2024) 104132

2024
[16]

Trabelsi, B

I. Trabelsi, B. Zeddini, M. Zolghadri, M. Barkallah, M. Haddar, Obsolescence prediction based on joint feature sel ection and machine learning techniques., ICAART (2) (2021) 787–794

2021
[17]

Jennings, D

C. Jennings, D. Wu, J. Terpenny, Forecasting obsolesce nce risk and product life cycle with machine learning, IEEE T ransactions on Components, Packaging and Manufacturing Technology 6 (201 6) 1428–1439
[18]

K.-S. Moon, H. W. Lee, H. Kim, Adaptive data selection-b ased machine learning algorithm for prediction of componen t obsolescence, Sensors 22 (2022) 7982

2022
[19]

Zhou, Machine learning, Springer nature, 2021

Z.-H. Zhou, Machine learning, Springer nature, 2021

2021
[20]

Hubauer, S

T. Hubauer, S. Lamparter, M. Roshchin, N. Solomakhina, S. Watson, Analysis of data quality issues in real-world ind ustrial data, in: Annual Conference of the PHM Society, volume 5, 2013

2013
[21]

T. Jess, P . Woodall, D. McFarlane, Overcoming limited d ataset availability when working with industrial organisa tions, in: 2015 IEEE 13th International Conference on Industrial Informatics (INDI N), IEEE, 2015, pp. 826–831

2015
[22]

Libes, S

D. Libes, S. Shin, J. Woo, Considerations and recommend ations for data availability for data analytics for manufac turing, in: 2015 IEEE International Conference on Big Data (Big Data), IEEE, 2015 , pp. 68–75

2015
[23]

Grichi, Y

Y . Grichi, Y . Beauregard, T. Dao, A random forest methodfor obsolescence forecasting, in: 2017 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management (IEEM), IEEE, 2017 , pp. 1602–1606

2017
[24]

Y . Liu, M. Zhao, An obsolescence forecasting method bas ed on improved radial basis function neural network, Ain Sha ms Engineering Journal 13 (2022) 101775

2022
[25]

K.-S. Moon, H. W. Lee, H. J. Kim, H. Kim, J. Kang, W. C. Paik , Forecasting obsolescence of components by using a cluster ing-based hybrid machine-learning algorithm, Sensors 22 (2022) 3244

2022
[26]

Cholaquidis, R

A. Cholaquidis, R. Fraiman, M. Sued, On semi-supervise d learning, TEST 29 (2020) 914–937

2020
[27]

Breiman, Random forests, Machine learning 45 (2001) 5–32

L. Breiman, Random forests, Machine learning 45 (2001) 5–32

2001
[28]

Grichi, Y

Y . Grichi, Y . Beauregard, T.-M. Dao, Optimization of ob solescence forecasting using new hybrid approach based on t he rf method and the meta-heuristic genetic algorithm, American Journal of Man agement 18 (2018)

2018
[29]

Grichi, T.-M

Y . Grichi, T.-M. Dao, Y . Beauregard, A new approach for o ptimal obsolescence forecasting based on the random forest (rf) technique and meta-heuristic particle swarm optimization (pso), in: Pro ceedings of the International Conference on Industrial Eng ineering and Operation...

2018
[30]

Sierra-Fontalvo, A

L. Sierra-Fontalvo, A. Gonzalez-Quiroga, J. Mesa, A de ep dive into addressing obsolescence in product design: A re view. heliyon, 9 (11), e21856, 2023

2023
[31]

Goodfellow, Deep learning, 2016

I. Goodfellow, Deep learning, 2016

2016
[32]

A. M. Nassef, M. A. Abdelkareem, H. M. Maghrabie, A. Baro utaji, Review of metaheuristic optimization algorithms fo r power systems problems, Sustainability 15 (2023) 9434

2023
[33]

L. Dinh, J. Sohl-Dickstein, S. Bengio, Density estimat ion using real nvp, arXiv preprint arXiv:1605.08803 (2016)

2016 arXiv
[34]

Xu, et al., Synthesizing tabular data using conditio nal GAN, Ph.D

L. Xu, et al., Synthesizing tabular data using conditio nal GAN, Ph.D. thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technolo gy, 2020

2020
[35]

M. Du ﬀ, N. D. Campbell, M. J. Ehrhardt, Regularising inverse probl ems with generative machine learning models, Journal of Mat hematical Imaging and Vision 66 (2024) 37–56

2024
[36]

Srinivas, R

S. Srinivas, R. V . Babu, Deep learning in neural network s: An overview, Computer Science (2015)

2015
[37]

Srivastava, G

N. Srivastava, G. Hinton, A. Krizhevsky, I. Sutskever, R. Salakhutdinov, Dropout: a simple way to prevent neural ne tworks from overﬁtting, The journal of machine learning research 15 (2014) 1929–195 8. 27

2014
[38]

Janakiramaiah, G

B. Janakiramaiah, G. Kalyani, S. Narayana, T. Bala Mura li Krishna, Reducing dimensionality of data using autoenco ders, in: Smart Intelligent Computing and Applications: Proceedings of th e Third International Conference on Smart Computing and Inf ormatics, V olume 2, Springe...

2020
[39]

Y . Wang, H. Y ao, S. Zhao, Auto-encoder based dimensiona lity reduction, Neurocomputing 184 (2016) 232–242

2016
[40]

Fournier, D

Q. Fournier, D. Aloise, Empirical comparison between a utoencoders and traditional dimensionality reduction met hods, in: 2019 IEEE Second International Conference on Artiﬁcial Intelligenc e and Knowledge Engineering (AIKE), IEEE, 2019, pp. 211–214

2019
[41]

Amini, V

M.-R. Amini, V . Feofanov, L. Pauletto, L. Hadjadj, E. De vijver, Y . Maximov, Self-training: A survey, arXiv preprin t arXiv:2202.12040 (2024)

2024 arXiv
[42]

T. Chai, R. R. Draxler, Root mean square error (rmse) or m ean absolute error (mae)?–arguments against avoiding rmse in the literature, Geoscientiﬁc model development 7 (2014) 1247–1250

2014
[43]

Carrara, J

N. Carrara, J. Ernst, On the estimation of mutual inform ation, in: Proceedings, volume 33, MDPI, 2020, p. 31

2020
[44]

J. C. Baez, T. Fritz, T. Leinster, A characterization of entropy in terms of information loss, Entropy 13 (2011) 1945 –1957

2011
[45]

Chakraborty, Topsis and modiﬁed topsis: A comparati ve analysis, Decision Analytics Journal 2 (2022) 100021

S. Chakraborty, Topsis and modiﬁed topsis: A comparati ve analysis, Decision Analytics Journal 2 (2022) 100021

2022
[46]

Hodges Jr, The signiﬁcance probability of the smirno v two-sample test, Arkiv för matematik 3 (1958) 469–486

J. Hodges Jr, The signiﬁcance probability of the smirno v two-sample test, Arkiv för matematik 3 (1958) 469–486

1958
[47]

J. J. Berman, Chapter 4—understanding your data, Data s impliﬁcation (2016) 135–187

2016
[48]

Taboga, Lectures on probability theory and mathemat ical statistics, (No Title) (2017)

M. Taboga, Lectures on probability theory and mathemat ical statistics, (No Title) (2017)

2017
[49]

S. Xu, W. W. Sun, G. Cheng, Utility theory of synthetic da ta generation, arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.10015 (2023)

2023 arXiv
[50]

Shalev-Shwartz, S

S. Shalev-Shwartz, S. Ben-David, Decision Trees, Camb ridge University Press, 2014, p. 212–218

2014
[51]

Hastie, S

T. Hastie, S. Rosset, J. Zhu, H. Zou, Multi-class adaboo st, Statistics and its Interface 2 (2009) 349–360

2009
[52]

Saad, Zenner diod obsolescence dataset, 2024

E. Saad, Zenner diod obsolescence dataset, 2024. URL: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15017365. doi:10.5281/zenodo.15017365

2024 doi
[53]

Smirnov, Table for estimating the goodness of ﬁt of em pirical distributions, The annals of mathematical statist ics 19 (1948) 279–281

N. Smirnov, Table for estimating the goodness of ﬁt of em pirical distributions, The annals of mathematical statist ics 19 (1948) 279–281

1948
[54]

Hastie, R

T. Hastie, R. Tibshirani, J. H. Friedman, J. H. Friedman , The elements of statistical learning: data mining, infere nce, and prediction, volume 2, Springer, 2009

2009
[55]

M. R. Junge, J. R. Dettori, Roc solid: Receiver operator characteristic (roc) curves as a foundation for better diag nostic tests, Global Spine Journal 8 (2018) 424–429

2018
[56]

Calders, S

T. Calders, S. Jaroszewicz, E ﬃcient auc optimization for classiﬁcation, in: European con ference on principles of data mining and knowledge discovery, Springer, 2007, pp. 42–53

2007
[57]

Papamakarios, E

G. Papamakarios, E. Nalisnick, D. J. Rezende, S. Mohame d, B. Lakshminarayanan, Normalizing ﬂows for probabilisti c modeling and inference, Journal of Machine Learning Research 22 (2021) 1 –64

2021
[58]

Kobyzev, S

I. Kobyzev, S. J. Prince, M. A. Brubaker, Normalizing ﬂo ws: An introduction and review of current methods, IEEE tran sactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence 43 (2020) 3964–3979. 28

2020

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

D. S. P . O. DoD, Diminishing Manufacturing Sources and Ma terial Shortages A Guidebook of Best Practices for Implemen ting a Robust DMSMS Management Program, United States Department of Defe nse, 2022. 26

work page 2022

[2] [2]

Trabelsi, M

I. Trabelsi, M. Zolghadri, B. Zeddini, M. Barkallah, M. H addar, Prediction of obsolescence degree as a function of ti me: A mathematical formulation, Computers in Industry 129 (2021) 103470

work page 2021

[3] [3]

F. J. R. Rojo, P . Baguley, N. Shaikh, R. Roy, S. Kelly, Tomc at: An obsolescence management capability assessment fram e- work, Journal of Physics: Conference Series 364 (2012) 0120 98. URL: https://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/364/1/012098. doi:10.1088/1742-6596/364/1/012098

work page doi:10.1088/1742-6596/364/1/012098 2012

[4] [4]

IEC 62402:2019, Obsolescence management, Standard, In ternational Electrotechnical Commission, Geneva, CH, 201 9

work page 2019

[5] [5]

Zolghadri, M

M. Zolghadri, M. Besbes, V . Bourgeois, E. Saad, Micro-el ectronic chips shortages and obsolescence: an empirical st udy, Procedia CIRP 120 (2023) 1570–1575

work page 2023

[6] [6]

M. A. Mellal, Obsolescence–a review of the literature, T echnology in Society 63 (2020) 101347

work page 2020

[7] [7]

Zolghadri, S.-A

M. Zolghadri, S.-A. Addouche, C. Baron, A. Soltan, K. Boi ssie, Obsolescence, rarefaction and their propagation, Re search in Engineering Design 32 (2021) 451–468

work page 2021

[8] [8]

´Zróbek, Remarks about methods of recognizing types of depre ciation and obsolescence, Studia i Materiały Towarzystwa N aukowego Nieruchomo´sci (2011) 65–72

R. ´Zróbek, Remarks about methods of recognizing types of depre ciation and obsolescence, Studia i Materiały Towarzystwa N aukowego Nieruchomo´sci (2011) 65–72

work page 2011