The effect of transaction costs, payment terms and power on the level of raw materials inventories
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
Abstract This paper proposes and tests an explanation for the level of raw materials inventories based on transaction cost economics theory and the role of power in a supply chain. According to this explanation, raw materials inventories are larger the higher a company's transaction costs and the lower its storage‐related production and management costs. Factors that affect these costs are the company's vulnerability to opportunism, whether the input becomes more or less costly to store and manage as it moves through the supply chain, payment terms and the company's power in relation to its supplier. This explanation for the level of raw materials inventories was tested on a large sample of customer industries matched to their main supplier industries. Consistent with this theory, the empirical results show that companies hold larger raw materials inventories the more money their suppliers spend on research and development and the less important the customers are to their suppliers. These results are important because they indicate companies must consider a wider range of factors than previously thought necessary when establishing inventory policy.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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