Integrating revenue management and sales and operations planning in a Make-To-Stock environment: softwood lumber case study
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
Most research regarding revenue management in manufacturing has considered only a short-term planning horizon, assuming supply and production data exogenously given. Motivated by the case of the Canadian softwood lumber industry, this paper offers additionally a medium-term visibility for firms with limited capacity and faced with seasonal markets. We propose a demand management process for Make-To-Stock environments, integrating sales and operations planning (S&OP) and order promising based on revenue management concepts. Given heterogeneous customers, divergent product structure and multiple sourcing locations in a multi-period context, we first define a multi-level decision framework in order to support medium-term, short-term and real-time sales decisions in a way to maximize profits and to enhance the service level offered to high-priority customers. We further propose a mathematical formulation integrating an S&OP network model in the Canadian softwood lumber industry and an order promising model using nested booking limits. This new formulation allows reviewing previous order promising decisions while respecting sales commitments. A rolling horizon simulation is used to evaluate the performance of the proposed process in various demand scenarios and provides evidence that better performances can be achieved compared to common demand management practices by integrating S&OP and revenue management concepts.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 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 it