Green supplier selection generic framework: a multi-attribute utility theory approach
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
This paper presents a generic framework integrating environmental and social criteria leading to a comprehensive selection process of green suppliers. Traditionally, price, quality, lead time and flexibility are considered for the supplier selection. With the increase in awareness of environmental and social responsibility issues, many companies are tending towards adopting green concepts and sourcing green suppliers. This study proposes a framework consisting of environmental (E), green (G) and organisational (O) factors that are required for the green supplier selection process. These factors are further classified as criteria for which attributes are presented. A hierarchy is constructed to facilitate in evaluating the importance of the selected criteria and alternatives of green suppliers. To cater to the multi-criteria decision-making approach with both quantitative and qualitative attributes, we applied the multiple attribute utility theory, which is a decision support that helps managers formulating viable sourcing strategies. A hypothetical example is presented to illustrate the applicability of the approach.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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