MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2589147849

Inventory control for point-of-use locations in hospitals

2012· article· en· W2589147849 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicOrganizational Management and Leadership
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersVrije Universiteit Amsterdam
KeywordsReorder pointInventory controlService levelLead timeOperations researchService (business)Perpetual inventoryEconomic order quantityComputer scienceOrder (exchange)Operations managementInventory theorySet (abstract data type)Cycle countControl (management)Point (geometry)Holding costCapacity managementMathematicsEconomicsStatisticsBusinessSupply chainMarketing
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Most inventory management systems at hospital departments are characterised by lost sales, periodic reviews with short lead times, and limited storage capacity. We develop two types of exact models that deal with all these characteristics. In a capacity model, the service level is maximised subject to a capacity restriction, and in a service model the required capacity is minimised subject to a service level restriction. We also formulate approximation models applicable for any lost-sales inventory system (cost objective, no lead time restrictions etc). For the capacity model, we develop a simple inventory rule to set the reorder levels and order quantities. Numerical results for this inventory rule show an average deviation of 1% from the optimal service levels. We also embed the single-item models in a multi-item system. Furthermore, we compare the performance of fixed order size replenishment policies and (R, s, S) policies.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.116
Threshold uncertainty score0.435

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.239 · 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