MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Observations on the economic manufacture quantity model with learning and forgetting

2007· article· en· W2062458956 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Transactions in Operational Research · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicSupply Chain and Inventory Management
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsForgettingComputer scienceUnit (ring theory)Value (mathematics)Production (economics)Mathematical economicsMathematical optimizationMathematicsEconomicsMachine learningMicroeconomicsCognitive psychologyMathematics education

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The economic order (manufacture) quantity model with learning and forgetting has attracted the attention of researchers since the 1960s. All the models developed have limitations, of which two will be addressed in this article. First, the models found in the literature do not address the problem of when the learning exponent b approaches or exceeds the value 1, where these models are mathematically invalid for the special cases of b =1 and 2, and not investigated for the cases 1< b <2 and b >2. Second, the models found in the literature assume that the holding cost per unit is fixed even though the unit production cost is decreasing because of learning. This limitation would suggest producing in smaller lot‐sizes than their optimal values. Mathematical models are developed, and existing learning models are revised to overcome these limitations. Numerical examples are presented with results discussed.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.605
Threshold uncertainty score0.721

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.114
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.236 · 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