MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2737757977 · doi:10.1287/ited.2017.0174

Game—The Online Wood Supply Game

2017· article· en· W2737757977 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

VenueINFORMS Transactions on Education · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicComplex Systems and Decision Making
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSupply chainComputer scienceSupply and demandContext (archaeology)Adaptation (eye)SimplicityBusinessMarketingMicroeconomicsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes the Wood Supply Game (WSG), a prize-winning e-learning tool that is freely available for players all over the world. The game effectively helps students and managers realize the challenges in managing demand and supply in wood supply chains, and gain insight into the types of measures required to make these divergent chains effective. The WSG is an adaptation of the Beer game, a popular didactic tool used to empirically demonstrate demand amplification in a simple and generic context. The supply chain modeled by the Beer game does not involve co-products, and thus is very different from the wood supply chain, which is divergent by nature. The WSG presented in this paper models a supply network with one point of divergence and demand for two products. This preserves the simplicity of the game but enables it to offer a base for supply network simulation in a large number of industrial sectors with divergent processes. We describe an online version of the WSG, discuss our experiences playing it with students and managers, and provide hints to the instructor.

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 categoriesScholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.303 · 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