MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2288202751 · doi:10.14288/1.0101196

Evaluation of a warehousing system in western Canada

2011· article· en· W2288202751 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Brian Pratt

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUrban and Freight Transport Logistics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study evaluates the existing system of distribution facilities for one firm and assesses the feasibility of establishing a.new warehouse. The framework employed for analysis attempts to measure the effects of various changes in the firm's distribution network on cost reduction and sales generation. For measurement of the cost ramifications of various warehouse location alternatives, the study establishes the inputs of market demand, warehouse capacities, and costs of distribution from warehouses to markets that are required. These inputs are then evaluated through use of a linear programme routine which has a sensitivity analysis. To evaluate the sales generation aspects of various locational alternatives, a subjective estimating procedure known as the Delphi is used. The Delphi is used specifically only to measure the relative importance of delivery times and warehouse location for the market at which the proposed warehouse is to be located, however, its general findings are also used for establishing the relative importance of customer service in all markets. The general conclusions of the analysis are that the sales generation impact of warehouses has been overemphasized by the company studied and, as a result, it is not feasible to establish a new warehouse in the location proposed. The analysis also indicates that the firm1s existing distribution network is too decentralized and that substantial savings will result if several warehouses are abandoned.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.427
Threshold uncertainty score0.367

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.151
Teacher spread0.122 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)Same topicUrban and Freight Transport LogisticsFrench-language works237,207