MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2096575645 · doi:10.1287/opre.2013.1238

Coordinating Inventory Control and Pricing Strategies Under Batch Ordering

2014· article· en· W2096575645 on OpenAlexaff
Yi Yang, Yun Zhou

Bibliographic record

VenueOperations Research · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicSupply Chain and Inventory Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHolding costInventory controlTime horizonMathematical optimizationOrder (exchange)Profit (economics)Regular polygonFunction (biology)EconomicsComputer scienceMathematicsOperations researchMicroeconomicsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we investigate joint pricing and inventory control problems in a finite-horizon, single-product, periodic-review setting with certain/uncertain supply capacities. The demands in different periods are random variables whose distributions depend on the posted price exhibiting the additive form. The order quantity in each period is required to be of integral multiples of a given specific batch size (denoted by Q). Inventory replenishment incurs a linear ordering cost. Referred to as the cost-rate function, the sum of holding and backorder costs can either be convex or quasi-convex. The objective is to determine a joint ordering and pricing decision that can maximize the total expected profit over the planning horizon. We first consider the case in which the cost-rate function is convex and show that the modified (r, Q) list-price policy is optimal for the system with certain and limited capacities, a special case of which is the (r, Q) list-price policy when capacities become unlimited. As supply capacities become random, the optimal policy follows a new structure wherein the optimal order-up-to level and posted price must be coordinated to make the optimal safety stock level follow the (r, Q) policy. We further consider the case of a quasi-convex cost-rate function, which may arise when a service level constraint is used as a surrogate for the shortage cost. We demonstrate that the (r, Q) list-price policy is optimal for the system without supply capacity constraints. In addition, extensions to several other models are discussed. The enabling technique is based on the notion of Q-jump convexity and its variants.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.942
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations35
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOperations ResearchSame topicSupply Chain and Inventory ManagementFrench-language works237,207