Supply chain collaboration: A state-of-the-art literature review
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Global competition in the marketing has led organizations to be more responsive and efficient to the customers' needs through quick-new product development and minimized delivery time. Customer satisfaction becomes the major issue for organizations; therefore organizations focus more and more on the collaborative supply chain. Thus, supply chain collaboration has become a major success factor for the organizations to achieve their corporate goals. The current research study is an attempt to address the supply chain collaboration through a systematic literature review. In findings, various specific areas have been examined to understand the necessity, evolution, issues and challenges, types, drivers, benefits, and barriers in the context of supply chain collaboration. Further, the research gap and future agenda have been derived which is very helpful for academics and practitioners to understand supply chain collaboration, gaps in the literature, and future agenda about the supply chain collaboration.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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 it