A model for assessing the greenness effort in a product supply chain
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many organisations are beginning to acknowledge that strategies and practices, which incorporate environmental considerations, can be tooled to acquire a competitive advantage. While proactive and value-seeking approaches have been suggested in the management literature, very few theories and frameworks have been presented in the domain of supply chain operations. In this paper, we suggest a framework, using gap analysis to compare the greenness effort for concurrent product supply chains. This praxis would help managers to achieve the following: (1) assess and benchmark a supply chain effort for a company product against similar products produced by competitors and (2) determine the gap between the current supply chain greenness effort and the ideal or targeted green supply chain. An illustrative example is used to substantiate the main argument. The results of this research would help state authorities and industrial managers keep track of the efforts made by companies when addressing environmental issues. This study responds to the needs of researchers in the green supply chain to develop models easy to understand and to apply by managers, not operational research specialists.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it