Green Supply Chain Performance Prediction Using a Bayesian Belief Network
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Green supply chain management (GSCM) has emerged as an important issue to lessen the impact of supply chain activities on the natural environment, as well as reduce waste and achieve sustainable growth of a company. To understand the effectiveness of GSCM, performance measurement of GSCM is a must. Monitoring and predicting green supply chain performance can result in improved decision-making capability for managers and decision-makers to achieve sustainable competitive advantage. This paper identifies and analyzes various green supply chain performance measures and indicators. A probabilistic model is proposed based on a Bayesian belief network (BBN) for predicting green supply chain performance. Eleven green supply chain performance indicators and two green supply chain performance measures are identified through an extensive literature review. Using a real-world case study of a manufacturing industry, the methodology of this model is illustrated. Sensitivity analysis is also performed to examine the relative sensitivity of green supply chain performance to each of the performance indicators. The outcome of this research is expected to help managers and practitioners of GSCM improve their decision-making capability, which ultimately results in improved overall organizational performance.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".