MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2132284017 · doi:10.1287/ited.1120.0090

An Educational Game in Collaborative Logistics

2013· article· en· W2132284017 on OpenAlexaff
Sophie D’Amours, Mikael Rönnqvist

Bibliographic record

VenueINFORMS Transactions on Education · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicQuality and Supply Management
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNegotiationComputer scienceProfit (economics)Game theoryGame DeveloperNon-cooperative gameSequential gameScreening gameCooperative game theorySimulations and games in economics educationOperations researchGame designKnowledge managementMicroeconomicsEconomicsMultimediaSociologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe an educational game in collaborative logistics. The game is based on an award-winning application in cost allocation in transportation. The purpose of the game is to acquire an understanding of negotiation, coalition building, and cost/profit sharing when the players have different powers and hold different levels of information. The game is played with each player representing a single company. The challenge for the players is to find an efficient coalition and to share the benefits and costs of the collaboration. We describe the underlying case study, review basic concepts in game theory, outline the teaching case, and discuss experiences from running the game in several countries and with students in business, engineering, and forestry.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations18
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueINFORMS Transactions on EducationSame topicQuality and Supply ManagementFrench-language works237,207