MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2014103299 · doi:10.5267/j.uscm.2014.8.004

Designing a bi-objective and multi-product supply chain network for the supply of blood

2014· article· en· W2014103299 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Meysam Arvan, Reza Tavakoli-Moghadam, Mohammad Abdollahi

Bibliographic record

VenueUncertain Supply Chain Management · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBlood donation and transfusion practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSupply chainProduct (mathematics)BusinessSupply chain networkComputer scienceChain (unit)Industrial organizationSupply chain managementOperations managementMarketingEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the past few years, operations research applications in health care operation management have grown quickly.On the other hand blood as a perishable, valuable and lifesaving product is one important asset of any healthcare center.Therefore, designing a blood supply network comes to importance.It also should be noted that a blood supply chain comprises specific modifications.This study intends to locate blood bank components in a network, and to determine the allocations among the network components.The supply chain components considered in this study are donation sites, testing and processing labs, blood banks, and demand points.It is known that demand centers such as hospitals and clinics highly depend on blood products and any deficiency in procurement can even result in a person's death.Thus, in the last layer of the considered network a transshipment sub-network is considered between demand points.Most of the intricacies in problem formulation of blood supply chain are regarded in this study; cases such as blood wastage, blood product decomposition in lab facilities, and transshipments between demand points.Due to the fact that for such an important and lifesaving supply chain the aim would go beyond minimizing cost, another objective function is presented for the problem.Hence, to obtain a Pareto solution for both objective functions ∊-constraint method is utilized.Finally, to demonstrate the applicability of the problem, the model is implemented on a number of problem sets.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations66
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUncertain Supply Chain ManagementSame topicBlood donation and transfusion practicesFrench-language works237,207