MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2593567126 · doi:10.1287/msom.2016.0603

Managing Production-Inventory Systems with Scarce Resources

2017· article· en· W2593567126 on OpenAlexaff
Saif Benjaafar, David Chen, Rowan Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueManufacturing & Service Operations Management · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicSupply Chain and Inventory Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersU.S. Forest Service
KeywordsAllowance (engineering)Production (economics)Profit (economics)Constraint (computer-aided design)MicroeconomicsEconomicsContext (archaeology)Order (exchange)Operations researchComputer scienceOperations managementMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider the problem of managing production in a production-inventory system where a firm is subject to an allowance (a limit) on either the amount of input it can use or the amount of output it can produce over a specified compliance period (in addition to being subject to a constraint on the production capacity). Examples of such settings are numerous and include those where limits are placed on the use of scarce natural resources as input or on the amount of waste or harmful pollution generated by production as output. We study the structure of the optimal production policy for such systems and show that it is determined by dynamic thresholds that depend only on the sum of the on-hand inventory level and the remaining allowance. We provide an effective approximate solution approach that can compute these thresholds efficiently while retaining their essential properties. We examine the differences between how an allowance constraint and a constraint on production capacity affect production decisions and show that they exhibit opposite effects over time. We also examine, in the context of an extended version of the problem where both the allowance amount and the production capacity are endogenous, optimal investments in allowance and production capacity and the impact of both on firm profit. We also consider the optimal demand fulfillment policy in settings where the firm can decide whether to back-order or to reject demand that cannot be satisfied from on-hand inventory. The online appendix is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.2016.0603 .

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)0.007
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations13
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManufacturing & Service Operations ManagementSame topicSupply Chain and Inventory ManagementFrench-language works237,207