MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1482816600

Fuzzy optimization of location decisions in supply chain management

2012· article· en· W1482816600 on OpenAlexaff
Omar S. Soliman, Ruhul Sarker, Sajjad Zahir

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Conference on Informatics and Systems · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMulti-Criteria Decision Making
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFuzzy logicComputer scienceSupply chainOperations researchSupply chain managementDecision support systemFuzzy numberFuzzy setData miningArtificial intelligenceEngineeringBusiness
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fuzzy optimization models provide a powerful decision support tool for optimization models in fuzzy environment. In this paper fuzzy goal programming (FGP) is integrated with the fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (FAHP) to determine optimal plant and distribution centre locations in a supply chain with special focus on the operational efficiencies of the distribution centres. The integrated FGP-FAHP model incorporates multiple conflicting objectives as demanded by the decision process. The concept of fuzzy logic is utilized to model the variation of demands at retails centres that makes the model more sophisticated to the real SCM problem. The FAHP is used to model the decision maker preferences and to handle information ambiguaties in the comparison judgment by introducing a linguistic variable, and to find the relative weights of multiple objectives in FGP. In addition to, the proposed FGP-FAHP provides a risk management decision support tool in SCM problem associated with information ambiguities.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.184
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.220 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Conference on Informatics and SystemsSame topicMulti-Criteria Decision MakingFrench-language works237,207