MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3034956817 · doi:10.5539/res.v12n3p1

The “Day After” Covid-19 Pandemic: Logistical Disorders in Perspective

2020· article· en· W3034956817 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Gilles Paché

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of European Studies · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicSupply Chain Resilience and Risk Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)BoomPandemicNew normalEconomic recoveryConsumption (sociology)Business2019-20 coronavirus outbreakSupply chainOrder (exchange)HumanitySevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)EconomicsPolitical scienceSociologyMarketingLawFinanceEngineeringMedicineVirology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Half of humanity experienced an unprecedented situation of lockdown during the Covid-19 pandemic of 2020. The sharp slowdown in trade and the shutdown of entire industrial and commercial sectors had major economic consequences, with a historic collapse in household consumption, particularly in Europe. One country after another decided to gradually organize a lockdown exit, taking into account the heavy health constraints involved. This lockdown exit, and the resulting boom of trade, is likely to come up against a major disruption of supply chains, which needs to be evaluated now. The research note proposes an exploratory reflection on a unique situation since the WW II, and the logistical implications of what can be called the “day after” the Covid-19 pandemic. In order to limit serious disorders in product flow monitoring, the question of a moderate rhythm of lockdown exit and economic recovery is raised.

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)0.002
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.008
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of European StudiesSame topicSupply Chain Resilience and Risk ManagementFrench-language works237,207