MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2287776494 · doi:10.1016/j.ifacol.2015.06.150

Modelling hierarchical planning process using a simulation-optimization system to anticipate the long-term impact of operational level silvicultural flexibility

2015· article· en· W2287776494 on OpenAlexaff
Shuva Gautam, Luc LeBel, Daniel Beaudoin, M. Simard

Bibliographic record

VenueIFAC-PapersOnLine · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Management and Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlexibility (engineering)Computer scienceProfit (economics)Operational planningOperations researchProcess (computing)Term (time)Supply chainRisk analysis (engineering)Operations managementIndustrial engineeringBusinessEngineeringEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hierarchical approach is used for forest management planning as opposed to a monolithic approach for its capability to better handle such a complex problem. However, in the approach, certain decisions are fixed at upper hierarchies and enforced upon operational level managers. The approach debilitates supply chains faced with uncertainty in both supply and demand. This study proposes an approach to provide greater flexibility to operational level managers and a mechanism to anticipate its impact on the upper level plans. Application of the approach to a case-study demonstrated that profit improvements of 2-4 % can be realized without an impact on upper level constraints.

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 score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.134
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations4
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIFAC-PapersOnLineSame topicForest Management and PolicyFrench-language works237,207