MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2031869633 · doi:10.4018/jiit.2007100103

Machine Learning-Based Demand Forecasting in Supply Chains

2007· article· en· W2031869633 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Intelligent Information Technologies · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicForecasting Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSupply chainRanking (information retrieval)Demand forecastingSupport vector machineKey (lock)Supply chain managementMachine learningArtificial intelligenceSupply and demandSet (abstract data type)Operations researchMarketingBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Effective supply chain management is one of the key determinants of success of today’s businesses. However, communication patterns between participants that emerge in a supply chain tend to distort the original consumer’s demand and create high levels of noise. In this article, we compare the performance of new machine learning (ML)-based forecasting techniques with the more traditional methods. To this end we used the data from a chocolate manufacturer, a toner cartridge manufacturer, as well as from the Statistics Canada manufacturing survey. A representative set of traditional and ML-based forecasting techniques have been applied to the demand data and the accuracy of the methods was compared. As a group, based on ranking, the average performance of the ML techniques does not outperform the traditional approaches. However, using a support vector machine (SVM) that is trained on multiple demand series has produced the most accurate forecasts.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.892
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.285 · 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