MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3096808798 · doi:10.18280/jesa.530414

Modeling and Simulation of a Multi-agent Green Supply Chain Management System for Retailers

2020· article· en· W3096808798 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Danfeng Wei

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal Européen des Systèmes Automatisés · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUrban and Freight Transport Logistics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSupply chainSupply chain managementInteractivityMulti-agent systemProactivityProcess managementComputer scienceNegotiationAutonomyService managementKnowledge managementSystems engineeringRisk analysis (engineering)BusinessEngineeringMarketingArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, the agent technology has been successfully applied in supply chains, thanks to its excellent interactivity, proactivity, and autonomy. However, the existing research on multi-agent green supply chain (GSC) stops on the strategic and tactical levels, failing to implement the relevant supply chain models. To overcome the limitation, this paper designs a multi-agent GSC management system for retailers, with the aim to obtain scientific collaboration strategies among multiple agents and to make effective logistics decisions for the supply chain. Firstly, a 3-layer hierarchical evaluation index system (EIS) was established under the framework of the multi-agent GSC management system. Next, the authors modeled the supply-demand relationship and dynamic game of multi-agent GSC, and discussed the cooperation and negotiation models among multiple agents. Experimental results show that the proposed multi-agent GSC management model is highly effective. The research findings provide a reference for the application of multi-agent technology in other types of supply chain enterprises.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.898
Threshold uncertainty score0.655

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 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

Citations11
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal Européen des Systèmes AutomatisésSame topicUrban and Freight Transport LogisticsFrench-language works237,207