Coordination between strategic forest management and tactical logistic and production planning in the forestry supply chain
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this paper, we study the coordination mechanism in the forestry supply chain between strategic forest management and tactical production planning. We first formulate an integrated model to establish a theoretical benchmark for performance of the entire supply chain. It is a mixed integer programming model that involves harvesting, bucking, transportation, production, and sales decisions for both tactical and strategic planning levels. We then present two sequential approaches S‐A and S‐B where the coordination is done through internal pricing. S‐A is the approach currently used in practice where harvesting in the forest is the main driver of the supply chain activities and internal pricing is introduced to control bucking decision in a separate stage. In contrast, S‐B takes downstream demand information into consideration and internal pricing directly influences harvesting decision in the first stage. In order to find the appropriate setting of internal pricing that leads to the system optimum, we suggest two heuristics H‐I and H‐II. The internal pricing in H‐I is based on dual values and in H‐II, it is derived from a Lagrangian decomposition. A real‐life case study in the Chilean forestry industry is used to compare the results of different approaches. It is shown that the new sequential approach S‐B generates as good feasible solution as that obtained from the integrated approach but in much less time. Both heuristics H‐I and H‐II bring about near‐optimal feasible solutions. H‐II also provides optimistic bound of the optimal objective function value, which can be used as a measure of the solution quality.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it