MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2340788651

Due date Quotation and Delivery Schedule In Dual Channel Supply chain

2016· article· en· W2340788651 on OpenAlex
Nooshin Nekoiemehr

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueScholarship at UWindsor (University of Windsor) · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Manufacturing and Logistics Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Windsor
KeywordsSupply chainDual (grammatical number)Computer scienceChannel (broadcasting)ScheduleBusinessTelecommunicationsMarketing
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the growth of e-business, many companies are trying to implement online (etail) channel besides their traditional retail stores to provide more convenient access of products for the customers and mainly enhance their customer service. These businesses are the main entities of a network called dual channel supply chain. Improving customer service as one of the main performance measures has got a growing interest in recent years from all entities of supply chain specifically manufacturing/service providers. In this context, we can express customer service as "being able to satisfy customer demands as soon as possible" and from the manufacturer's point of view, it is potentially achievable by coordination of scheduling and reliable due date quotation. In this dissertation, we consider due date quotation problem coordinated with scheduling in a two-echelon dual channel supply chain from the manufacturer point of view. We study three main problems.

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.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.771
Threshold uncertainty score0.673

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.174 · 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