MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998874964 · doi:10.1080/00207540600891408

Lot sizing with bounded inventory and lost sales

2006· article· en· W1998874964 on OpenAlexafffund
X. Liu, Chengbin Chu, Chengen Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Production Research · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicSupply Chain and Inventory Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSizingProduction (economics)Bounded functionCapacity planningHolding costProduction planningLost salesOperations researchComputer scienceMaterial requirements planningAggregate planningMathematical optimizationEconomicsOperations managementEngineeringMathematicsMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In production planning, there can be situations where the ability to meet customer demands is constrained by inventory capacity rather than production capacity. This situation often happens in petrochemical manufacturing, food processing, and glass manufacturing. Only a few studies can be found in the literature for this situation, and among these lost sales usually are not considered. In this paper, we consider the lot sizing problem with bounded inventory. We further consider that (1) lost sales are allowed; (2) production cost functions are non-increasing with respect to the time period; and (3) inventory capacity is non-decreasing with respect to the time period. With these considerations, we present a model as well as an algorithm which has a polynomial time complexity. An illustration is given to demonstrate both the application of our model and the algorithm.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Citations27
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Production ResearchSame topicSupply Chain and Inventory ManagementFrench-language works237,207