MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2994153245

Evaluating Lateral Transshipment Policy in a Two-Echelon Inventory System

2005· article· en· W2994153245 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Satyendra Kumar, Rao V. Venkata

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Comparative International Management · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicSupply Chain and Inventory Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStock (firearms)WarehouseOperations researchTransshipment (information security)Stock managementSupply chainHolding costInformation sharingComputer scienceTotal costStockoutSafety stockTransfer (computing)BusinessOperations managementMicroeconomicsEconomicsMathematicsMarketingEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Emergency shipments from higher and/or same echelon levels are one of the popular tools to handle the stock-out position at some warehouse. Our paper deals with a lateral stock transshipment model involving one plant and two warehouses, lateral transshipment is considered as an option at each re-order decision under the standard (r,Q) inventory replenishment policy. We focus on incorporating the above stock transfer feature in the order fulfillment decision and designed an simulation to find the effect of lateral stock transfer policy on various parameters viz. average inventory at each warehouse, average number of stock-out days at each warehouse, total cost (comprising of inventory cost, stock-out cost and transportation cost). The experimental results show that the stock transfer policy has the potential to reduce the total cost, average inventory and average stock-out days. We have also compared the cases where information is shared online or with some delay. The delay is because of serial communication between the supply chain players. The results show that there are benefits of no information delay i.e. online information sharing over the case with information delay.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.839
Threshold uncertainty score0.933

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Comparative International ManagementSame topicSupply Chain and Inventory ManagementFrench-language works237,207