Shelf Space Management When Demand Depends on the Inventory Level
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two factors that their influence on the demand has been investigated in many papers are (i) the shelf space allocated to a product and to its complement or supplement products and (ii) the instantaneous inventory level seen by customers. Here we analyze the joint shelf space allocation and inventory decisions for multiple items with demand that depends on both factors. The traditional approach to solve inventory models with a state‐dependent demand rate uses a time domain approach. However, this approach often does not lead to closed‐form expressions for the profit rate with both dependencies. We analyze the problem in the inventory domain via level crossing theory. This approach leads to closed‐form expressions for a large set of demand rate functions exhibiting both dependencies. These closed‐form expressions substantially simplify the search for optimal solutions; thus we use them to solve the joint inventory control and shelf space allocation problem. We consider examples with two products to investigate the significance of capturing both demand dependencies. We show that in some settings it is important to capture both dependencies. We consider two heuristics, each one of them ignores one of the two dependencies. Using these heuristics it seems that ignoring the dependency on the shelf space might be less harmful than ignoring the dependency on the inventory level, which, based on computational results, can lead to profit losses of more than 6%. We demonstrate that retailers should use their operational control, e.g., reorder point, to promote higher demand products.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".