MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2020460902 · doi:10.1504/ijmtm.2008.015972

Modelling information sharing to improve just-in-time purchasing vendor evaluation

2007· article· en· W2020460902 on OpenAlex
James T. Ding, Rohana J. Karunamuni

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

VenueInternational Journal of Manufacturing Technology and Management · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicSupply Chain and Inventory Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVendorPurchasingQuality (philosophy)Order (exchange)Information sharingComputer scienceOperations researchManufacturing engineeringOperations managementBusinessMarketingEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vendor evaluation is an important step for a manufacturer's purchasing operation. For firms adopting Just-In-Time Purchasing (JITP) strategy, vendor evaluation is critical in quality improvement and cost reduction. In this paper, we examine the value of information sharing in improving vendor evaluation. We build stochastic models for three different scenarios of information sharing to illustrate the advantages for JITP vendor evaluation under the Assemble-To-Order (ATO) manufacturing environment. We show how integrating statistical and analytical tools with Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) packages can help achieve efficient and effective managerial decision-making in JITP.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.792
Threshold uncertainty score0.590

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.238 · 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