MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162860386 · doi:10.5267/j.ijiec.2011.06.008

A fast-response production-inventory model for deteriorating seasonal products with learning in set-ups

2011· article· en· W2162860386 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ibraheem Abdul, Atsuo Murata

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Industrial Engineering Computations · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicSupply Chain and Inventory Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProduction (economics)Set (abstract data type)Operations managementComputer scienceOperations researchEconometricsBusinessEconomicsMathematicsMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The classical production-inventory model assumes that both demand and set-up costs are constant.However, in real manufacturing environment, managers usually embark on continuous improvement programmes that often lead to more effective use of tools and machineries and consequently reduction in set-up costs.In fact, constant emphasis on reduction of set-up costs is usually cited as one of the factors responsible for the efficiency of Japanese manufacturing methods.On the other hand, the demand for seasonal product is often characterized by a mixture of time-dependent patterns over the entire season.This paper investigates the effect of learning-based reduction in set-up costs on the optimal schedules and costs of a production-inventory system for deteriorating seasonal products.The demand pattern is a general three-phase ramp-type demand function that represents the various phases of demand commonly observed in many seasonal products in the market.A two-parameter Weibull-distribution function is used for the deterioration of items in order to make the model more generalized and realistic.The study further presents two different multi-period production strategies that can ensure a fast-response to customers' demand and compare them with the usual single period strategy.The Numerical example and sensitivity analysis shows that learning-based reduction in set-up costs leads to higher production frequency and shorter production runs which are vital aspects of the just-in-time (JIT) philosophy.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.183 · 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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Industrial Engineering ComputationsSame topicSupply Chain and Inventory ManagementFrench-language works237,207