Indeed that's been a huge problem to date. Here's hoping they've made actual progress: "The robust process is tolerant to contaminants in the feed. This means easier pretreatment of the feed before the Olefy processing." (from the bullet points about halfway through the article)
I had misunderstood this idea as minimising the WIP, but it's about optimisation.
Quotes:
"How can I find out what the ideal WIP limit is for the system I am in?"
"After a few iterations and having recorded the learnings in retrospectives, we collectively decided to increase the WIP."
Well, there are two important limiting cases when it comes to minimising WIP: zero and one.
Assuming your work is productive in the first place, zero WIP would be bad.
One WIP, known as "single piece flow" is actually the ultimate optimisation in production. So from that perspective, optimising and minimising is the same thing.
These are the measures to watch as they were unavailable at the start of the pandemic. Hospital admissions, Covi-19 occupied beds and ventilator beds have all roughly doubled from 1-14 Sep.
As used in the Event Horizon Telescope from what I've been reading. Multi-generational, upgradeable, modular, resilient, robust, fixable, shippable storage (any adjectives I've missed?) - with thoroughly understood performance for high data rate transfers - operating in at high altitude away from normal spare parts supply chains. Device production lifecycle to match scientific programme schedule. Somewhere in the region of 6PB's worth crated and returned post-acquisition to the EHT consortium processing sites.
Do you think wider application is possible of "no-till farming"? That is supposed to protect the subsoil ecosystem, but unfortunately I can't imagine it working at commercial agriculture levels, although "no-dig gardening" apparently is possible to market-garden scale.
Looks like this is the paper referred to - published yesterday: "Man against machine: diagnostic performance of a deep learning convolutional neural network for dermoscopic melanoma recognition in comparison to 58 dermatologists", by H.A. Haenssle et al. Annals of Oncology. doi:10.1093/annonc/mdy166
https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdy166