MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Purchasing Framework for B2B Pricing Decisions and Risk‐sharing in Supply Chains*

2002· article· en· W2013717652 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

VenueDecision Sciences · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicSupply Chain and Inventory Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPurchasingSupply chainBusinessPurchasing managementSupply chain managementCorporationComputer scienceIndustrial organizationMicroeconomicsMarketingEconomicsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT This paper presents a common modelling structure for (i) the implementation of operational policies by individual purchasing managers of risk‐sharing agreements among supply‐chain partners, and (ii) the integration of brick and click purchasing policies in a B2B. The problem of price uncertainty created within these two environments is modelled as a stochastic repetitive‐sales problem, applicable to any probability distribution. The model identifies sufficient conditions for regenerative ordering cycles, which allows for the use of the renewal reward theorem. The end result is a two‐price purchasing policy, which may substantially ease implementation problems across a global corporation's purchasing managers world‐wide and across B2B markets.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.565
Threshold uncertainty score0.896

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.216 · 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