MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2007510152 · doi:10.1287/opre.1110.0933

TECHNICAL NOTE—Inventory Systems with a Generalized Cost Model

2011· article· en· W2007510152 on OpenAlexafffund
Woonghee Tim Huh, Ganesh Janakiraman, Alp Muharremoglu, Anshul Sheopuri

Bibliographic record

VenueOperations Research · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicSupply Chain and Inventory Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMathematical optimizationHolding costQuasiconvex functionConstraint (computer-aided design)Function (biology)Position (finance)Total costOrder (exchange)Economic order quantityComputer scienceEconomic shortageConvex functionCarrying costRegular polygonPenalty methodMathematicsConvex optimizationEconomicsConvex setSupply chainMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study a single-stage inventory system with a generalized shortage penalty cost that includes the following three components: (i) a cost that is an increasing function of the number of backordered units in a period, (ii) a fixed cost incurred for each period in which there is a backorder irrespective of how many units are backordered, and finally (iii) a cost that is an increasing function of the number of periods a customer is backordered. We show the problem can be transformed into one in which the backorder cost depends on the inventory position only. Then we present two sets of conditions; the first one restricts our attention to a special case of the generalized penalty cost model while the second one restricts our attention to stationary demand models with some distributional assumptions. Under the first (resp. second) set of conditions, we show that the expected cost in a period can be expressed as a convex (resp. quasiconvex) function of the after-ordering inventory position. We use this property to prove the optimality of order-up-to policies under both sets of conditions and discuss extensions to the cases where either a fixed ordering cost or a batch ordering constraint is present.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.189
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.153 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations22
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOperations ResearchSame topicSupply Chain and Inventory ManagementFrench-language works237,207