Integrated methodological frameworks for modelling agent-based advanced supply chain planning systems: A systematic literature review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: The objective of this paper is to provide a systematic literature review of recent developments in methodological frameworks for the modelling and simulation of agent-based advanced supply chain planning systems. Design/methodology/approach: A systematic literature review is provided to identify, select and make an analysis and a critical summary of all suitable studies in the area. It is organized into two blocks: the first one covers agent-based supply chain planning systems in general terms, while the second one specializes the previous search to identify those works explicitly containing methodological aspects. Findings: Among sixty suitable manuscripts identified in the primary literature search, only seven explicitly considered the methodological aspects. In addition, we noted that, in general, the notion of advanced supply chain planning is not considered unambiguously, that the social and individual aspects of the agent society are not taken into account in a clear manner in several studies and that a significant part of the works are of a theoretical nature, with few real-scale industrial applications. An integrated framework covering all phases of the modelling and simulation process is still lacking in the literature visited. Research limitations/implications: The main research limitations are related to the period covered (last four years), the selected scientific databases, the selected language (i.e. English) and the use of only one assessment framework for the descriptive evaluation part. Practical implications: The identification of recent works in the domain and discussion concerning their limitations can help pave the way for new and innovative researches towards a complete methodological framework for agent-based advanced supply chain planning systems. Originality/value: As there are no recent state-of-the-art reviews in the domain of methodological frameworks for agent-based supply chain planning, this paper contributes to systematizing and consolidating what has been done in recent years and uncovers interesting research gaps for future studies in this emerging field.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.058 | 0.142 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.033 | 0.025 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".