A dynamic allocation heuristic for centralized safety stock
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract An inventory system that consists of a depot (central warehouse) and retailers (regional warehouses) is considered. The system is replenished regularly on a fixed cycle by an outside supplier. Most of the stock is direct shipped to the retailer locations but some stock is sent to the central warehouse. At the beginning of any one of the periods during the cycle, the central stock can then be completely allocated out to the retailers. In this paper we propose a heuristic method to dynamically (as retailer inventory levels change with time) determine the appropriate period in which to do the allocation. As the optimal method is not tractable, the heuristic's performance is compared against two other approaches. One presets the allocation period, while the other provides a lower bound on the expected shortages of the optimal solution, obtained by assuming that we know ahead of time all of the demands, period by period, in the cycle. The results from extensive simulation experiments show that the dynamic heuristic significantly outperforms the “preset” approach and its performance is reasonably close to the lower bound. Moreover, the logic of the heuristic is appealing and the calculations, associated with using it, are easy to carry out. Sensitivities to various system parameters (such as the safety factor, coefficient of variation of demand, number of regional warehouses, external lead time, and the cycle length) are presented. © 2005 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Naval Research Logistics, 2005.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".