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

Game—The Online Wood Supply Game

2017· article· en· W2737757977 on OpenAlexaff
Sophie D’Amours, Philippe Marier, Mikael Rönnqvist, Riadh Azouzi, Dag Fjeld

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.087

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0260.004

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

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

Citations21
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueINFORMS Transactions on EducationSame topicComplex Systems and Decision MakingFrench-language works237,207