MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2020404569 · doi:10.1080/07408170701246641

Integrated design of supply chain networks with three echelons, multiple commodities and technology selection

2007· article· en· W2020404569 on OpenAlexaff
Samir Elhedhli, Fatma Gzara

Bibliographic record

VenueIIE Transactions · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFacility Location and Emergency Management
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematical optimizationCutting-plane methodHeuristicSupply chainSelection (genetic algorithm)Point (geometry)Relaxation (psychology)Integer programmingComputer scienceUpper and lower boundsLinear programming relaxationDecompositionMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider a strategic supply chain design problem with three echelons, multiple commodities and technology selection. We model the problem as a tri-echelon, capacitated facility location problem that decides on the location of plants and warehouses, their capacity and technology planning, the assignment of commodities to plants and the flow of commodities to warehouses and customer zones. We use a mixed-integer programming formulation strengthened by valid but redundant constraints and apply Lagrangean relaxation to decompose the problem by echelon. Lagrangean relaxation provides a lower bound that is calculated using an interior-point cutting plane method. Feasible solutions are generated using a primal heuristic that uses the solution of the subproblems. Unlike common practice in the literature, the decomposition does not aim at getting easy subproblems, but rather at getting subproblems that preserve most of the characteristics of the original problem. Not only does this provide a sharp lower bound but also leads to a simple and efficient primal heuristic. We can afford to have relatively difficult subproblems because the interior-point cutting plane method used to solve the Lagrangean dual makes clever and selective choices of the Lagrangean multipliers leading to fewer calls to the subproblems. Computational results indicate the efficiency of the approach in providing a sharp bound and in generating feasible solutions that are of high quality.

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)0.002
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.184 · 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

Citations43
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIIE TransactionsSame topicFacility Location and Emergency ManagementFrench-language works237,207