CONTINUOUS REVIEW INVENTORY MODELS FOR PERISHABLE ITEMS WITH LEADTIMES
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We consider a continuous review (s, S) model of perishable items with lost sales. Once items are perished the entire inventory drops instantaneously to zero. The total cost includes the cost of: ordering, unsatisfied demand, units destroyed, holding, and fixed cost of perishability. Both the time to perishability and the lead times are assumed to be exponentially distributed while two cases of demand distribution are considered: Poisson and compound Poisson with general demand sizes. We study the average cost criterion and provide computational results on the problem of finding the optimal re-order level,s, and order up-to level,S. None of the known work on the subject is as general as the model presented here. Our analysis leads to several insights on the optimal (s, S) policies for perishable items in the presence of lead times. For example, we demonstrate that the effectiveness of a heuristic that ignores perishability (and is also analyzed here) decreases with the demand variability and that the cost may either increase or decrease with this variability.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".