MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2069714626 · doi:10.1080/00207540903449888

Inventory control of an item with a probabilistic replenishment lead time and a known supplier shutdown period

2010· article· en· W2069714626 on OpenAlexaff
Edward A. Silver, Nicolas Zufferey

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Production Research · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicSupply Chain and Inventory Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLead timeHeuristicShutdownOperations researchInterval (graph theory)Inventory controlProbabilistic logicComputer scienceMathematical optimizationDuration (music)Discrete event simulationOperations managementSimulationStatisticsEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we address an important practical situation, namely where the usual replenishment lead time (when the supplier's production facility is operating) is a random variable and the supplier shuts down for an interval of known duration (for maintenance, vacation, etc.) each year. The demand rate is constant and any demand when out of stock is assumed to be lost. Under such circumstances we develop a heuristic procedure to decide when to initiate replenishment as well as the associated order-up-to-levels. Through the use of simulation (which accurately estimates the average costs per unit time), the heuristic is shown to perform excellently in a selection of small size problems when one can find the optimal solution. For a large number of problems of more realistic size, the use of simulation reveals that the heuristic achieves substantial cost savings when compared with a simpler, baseline approach. The heuristic itself does not require the use of simulation. The sensitivity of total expected costs to various parameters (such as the length of the shutdown interval and characteristics of the lead time distribution) is 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.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.754
Threshold uncertainty score0.761

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.272 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations21
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Production ResearchSame topicSupply Chain and Inventory ManagementFrench-language works237,207