MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010872445 · doi:10.1108/03684921011043198

A review of enterprise risk management in supply chain

2010· review· en· W2010872445 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueKybernetes · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicSupply Chain Resilience and Risk Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSupply chain risk managementSupply chainRisk analysis (engineering)Risk managementContext (archaeology)Supply chain managementComputer scienceIdentification (biology)OriginalityRisk assessmentBusinessService managementMarketingFinanceComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to review published approaches to supply chain risk management, to include identification and classification of types of risks, cases, and models. Specific aspects of risk in supply chains involving China are also addressed. Design/methodology/approach Literature review provides sources which are synthesized. Findings A generic framework is identified, then categorizations of supply chain risks are compared. Cases and models applied to the study of supply chain risk are reviewed briefly. A review of Chinese risk in the supply chain context is provided. Originality/value This review includes many current studies, and is a source of useful references for those examining supply chain risk.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.851
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.261 · 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