On the Effectiveness of Zero-Inventory-Ordering Policies for the Economic Lot-Sizing Model with a Class of Piecewise Linear Cost Structures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We consider an economic lot-sizing problem with a special class of piecewise linear ordering costs, which we refer to as the class of modified all-unit discount cost functions. Such an ordering cost function represents transportation costs charged by many less-than truckload carriers. We show that even special cases of the lot-sizing problem are NP-hard and therefore analyze the effectiveness of easily implementable policies. In particular, we demonstrate that there exists a zero-inventory-ordering(ZIO) policy, i.e., a policy in which an order is placed only when the inventory level drops to zero, whose total inventory and ordering cost is no more than 4/3 times the optimal cost. Furthermore, if the ordering cost function does not vary over time, then the cost of the best ZIO policy is no more than 5.6/4.6 times the optimal cost. These results hold for any transportation and holding cost functions that satisfy the following properties: (i) they are non decreasing functions, and (ii) the associated cost per unit is non increasing. Finally, we report on a numerical study that shows the effectiveness of ZIO policies on a set of test problems.
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 | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".