MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2145231019 · doi:10.1109/icit.2002.1189351

A multi-criterion decision model for advanced manufacturing technology acquisition in supply chain networks

2003· article· en· W2145231019 on OpenAlexafffund
Navneet Vidyarthi, R.S. Lashkari

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicQuality and Supply Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSupply chainComponent (thermodynamics)Key (lock)Computer scienceManufacturingAdvanced manufacturingSupply chain managementManufacturing engineeringInteger programmingOrder (exchange)BusinessEngineeringMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Supply chains are the key to successful business performance in manufacturing and service organizations. One of the biggest challenges faced by these organizations in the chain is the need to respond to frequent and unpredictable changes in the market. Acquisition of advanced manufacturing technology (AMT) in the manufacturing plants constituting the supply chain network can be used as a strategy to respond to these changes. We propose a mixed integer programming model (MIP) that can determine the appropriate combination of various components and levels of AMT by minimizing the total technology acquisition costs under conflicting technical, managerial and financial objectives in order to meet the demand in the respective time periods. The model can aid the manufacturing plants/supply chain driver in various ways: (1). by generating and comparing various AMT alternatives for the manufacturing plant, (2). to assess the overall impact of change in performance level of one component of technology, and (3). run sensitivity analysis on technology capacity requirements, performance levels of various components and levels of AMT and various associated costs.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations3
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicQuality and Supply ManagementFrench-language works237,207