MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2317802191 · doi:10.1109/tem.2016.2527684

A Discrete Stress–Strength Interference Theory-Based Dynamic Supplier Selection Model for Maintenance Service Outsourcing

2016· article· en· W2317802191 on OpenAlexafffund
Ling Li, Min Liu, Weiming Shen, Guoqing Cheng

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Engineering Management · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReliability and Maintenance Optimization
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
FundersNational Research Council CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsOutsourcingService (business)Asset specificityOperations researchBusinessComputer scienceSupply chainReliability (semiconductor)Process managementReliability engineeringIndustrial organizationMarketingEngineeringTransaction costFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Maintenance service outsourcing is a strategic driver for asset intensive industries pursuing the enhancement of supply chain performance. Maintenance service supplier selection plays a relevant role in this premise since its significant impact on equipment availability, and hence, on business success. To periodically review suppliers' performances and update the outsourcing contract, a discrete stress-strength interference (DSSI) theory-based dynamic supplier selection model is presented for maintenance service outsourcing process. Taken account of the influence of randomness and uncertainty, a novel and universal evaluation criterion, demand fulfillment level (DFL) is introduced based on the DSSI theory. DFL is relevant to two random variables, which are random user's service order quantity (stress) and random supplier's service fulfillment quantity (strength), and DFL is defined as the probability that the latter (strength) is larger than the former (stress). Based on DFL, the proposed model can help users outsource the corresponding maintenance service to the most suitable supplier (maximum supplier reliability) at different periods. The decision rule can be described as a dynamic 3-D diagram, according to which decision makers can periodically review suppliers' performances and update the outsourcing contract. A case study on maintenance service supplier selection problem for a steel company illustrates the effectiveness of the proposed model.

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)0.003
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.187 · 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

Citations22
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Engineering ManagementSame topicReliability and Maintenance OptimizationFrench-language works237,207