MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2121014767 · doi:10.1002/nav.20386

Base‐stock policies in capacitated assembly systems: Convexity properties

2009· article· en· W2121014767 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueNaval Research Logistics (NRL) · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicSupply Chain and Inventory Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsConvexityHolding costStock (firearms)StockoutTime horizonOperations researchMathematical optimizationEconomic shortageComputer scienceOrder (exchange)Economic order quantityInventory costRegular polygonFunction (biology)EconomicsOperations managementBusinessMathematicsFinanceSupply chainMarketingEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We study an assembly system with a single finished product managed using an echelon base‐stock or order‐up‐to policy. Some or all operations have capacity constraints. Excess demand is either backordered in every period or lost in every period. We show that the shortage penalty cost over any horizon is jointly convex with respect to the base‐stock levels and capacity levels. When the holding costs are also included in the objective function, we show that the cost function can be written as a sum of a convex function and a concave function. Throughout the article, we discuss algorithmic implications of our results for making optimal inventory and capacity decisions in such systems.© 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Naval Research Logistics, 2010

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.765
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.278
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.077 · 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