MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2051202478 · doi:10.4102/jtscm.v7i1.87

Supplier evaluation: The first step in effective sourcing

2013· article· en· W2051202478 on OpenAlexaff
Kateřina Pikousová, Petr Průša

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Transport and Supply Chain Management · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMulti-Criteria Decision Making
Canadian institutionsTransport Canada
FundersUniverzita Pardubice
KeywordsPurchasingBusinessQuality (philosophy)Process managementSupplier evaluationSupplier relationship managementMarketingSelection (genetic algorithm)Strategic sourcingRisk analysis (engineering)Supply chainOperations managementIndustrial organizationComputer scienceSupply chain managementStrategic planningEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The evaluation and selection of suppliers are important tasks in any organisation. Each organisation needs to have a supplier evaluation matrix or model in place. The goal of this article is not only to give an overview of supplier performance evaluation techniques but also to present an example of such a supplier evaluation matrix used in practice. The article shows that suppliers’ qualities, strategies and abilities affect a buying company’s business. Reliable suppliers can help to develop stabile, long-term relationships that will be beneficial to both parties. Effective sourcing and purchasing require high-quality suppliers.

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 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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.586
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations7
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Transport and Supply Chain ManagementSame topicMulti-Criteria Decision MakingFrench-language works237,207