MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2591965828 · doi:10.1111/1911-3838.12136

Assembly <scp>FG</scp>: An Educational Case on <scp>MRP II</scp> Integrated within ERP

2017· article· en· W2591965828 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sherwood Lane Lambert, Richard V. Calvasina, Sarah Bee, D. Woodworth

Bibliographic record

VenueAccounting Perspectives · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicProduct Development and Customization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterial requirements planningManufacturing resource planningEnterprise resource planningEconomic shortageInventory managementOperations managementBusinessScheduleScheduling (production processes)Inventory controlOperations researchComputer scienceManufacturing engineeringProcess managementMarketingEngineeringProduction (economics)EconomicsOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This case teaches students how discrete (job order) manufacturing companies use Manufacturing Resource Planning ( MRP II ) within Enterprise Resource Planning ( ERP ) systems to plan purchase orders for direct materials and shop orders for work‐in‐process and finished goods. Students simulate MRP II integrated within ERP , using Microsoft Excel to learn MRP II 's bill‐of‐materials ( BOM ) Explosion that plans order quantities and MRP II 's scheduling logic that uses lead‐times to determine start dates for planned orders. Students explain why MRP II is most practical and effective when executed within ERP and how MRP II can reduce excess inventories, prevent inventory shortages, and help companies deliver quality products to customers on schedule. Also, students explain why BOM , inventory, and lead‐time inaccuracies can adversely affect the accuracy of MRP II ‐planned replenishments and identify controls that reduce the risks of these inaccuracies.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.003

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations13
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAccounting PerspectivesSame topicProduct Development and CustomizationFrench-language works237,207