MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2966200344 · doi:10.18280/jesa.520215

VMI & TPL Supply Chain Coordination Based on Evolutionary Game

2019· article· fr· W2966200344 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ying Jie Song, Yuanping Cao

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal Européen des Systèmes Automatisés · 2019
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCollaboration in agile enterprises
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersWuzhou UniversityNational Science Foundation
KeywordsSupply chainCoordination gameBusinessComputer scienceProcess managementMicroeconomicsEconomicsMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Contraposing the three-level vendor managed inventory & third party logistics (VMI & TPL) supply chain composed of single vendor, single TPL and single retailer, this paper introduces the buyback contract model and conducts evolutionary game theory-based comparative analysis on the evolutionary stable strategies of supply chain before and after the introduction of the model.According to the result of the evolutionary game between vendor and retailer, the two parties in the original VMI & TPL supply chain either adopts the strategy of (cooperation, cooperation) or (non-cooperation, non-cooperation), leaving the supply chain in an unstable state; after the introduction of the buyback contract model, the supply chain profit is redistributed, and the two parties turn to the strategy of (cooperation, cooperation).In other words, the introduction of the buyback contract model improves the coordination and stability of the VMI & TPL supply chain.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal Européen des Systèmes AutomatisésSame topicCollaboration in agile enterprisesFrench-language works237,207