Static and Dynamic Pricing Strategies in a Closed-Loop Supply Chain with Reference Quality Effects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Remanufacturing of returned products has been increasingly recognized in industries as an effective approach to face environmental responsibility, government regulations, and increased awareness of consumers. In this paper, we address a closed-loop supply chain (CLSC) in which the manufacturer produces the brand-new products, as well as the remanufactured goods while the retailer sells these products to customers. We consider several different scenarios: the manufacturer and the retailer adopt a steady-state price or a dynamic price with reference quality effects in a centralized case; either, neither or both the manufacturer and the retailer price dynamically with reference quality effects, respectively, in a decentralized model. We solve the problem with the retailer recycling the sold copies and deduce the optimal pricing strategies while the manufacturer in charge of recovering the used items in such a CLSC. The result shows that dynamic pricing strategies are much more profitable for the supply chain and its members when compared with pricing statically; the dynamic pricing strategies with time-varying quality characterized by reference quality are more suited to a long-term and cooperative closed-loop supply chain. Moreover, the optimal recycling fraction relies on the recovery cost coefficient and proves to be uniform despite adopting a dynamic price and quality in all distinct cases.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".