Définition du risque optimal de rupture de stock d’un composant en cas d’approvisionnement d’urgence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
On s’interesse ici a la determination de la probabilite de rupture optimale d’un composant utilise par un ou plusieurs modules alternatifs montes sur une ou plusieurs lignes d’assemblage. Le contexte etudie est celui d’une chaine logistique dediee a une production de masse de produits fortement diversifies, comme celui rencontre dans l’industrie automobile. L’approche de la MRP (Material Requirement Planning) est adaptee pour piloter cette chaine dans laquelle l’eloignement des unites de production conduit a un panachage de production a la commande et de production pour stock du composant auquel on s’interesse. Pour eviter toute propagation des consequences d’une rupture de stock en aval de la chaine logistique, un approvisionnement d’urgence est toujours declenche avant son occurrence. La definition du stock de securite – et du risque de rupture associe – se base sur un modele monoperiode integrant le cout des composants inutilises et les differents couts induits par l’approvisionnement d’urgence (transport et production). Les solutions analytiques proposees sont illustrees numeriquement et une analyse des conditions de dominance economique des deux principales politiques alternatives d’approvisionnement d’urgence est menee.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".