A Dynamic Pricing Strategy for a 3PL Provider with Heterogeneous Customers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We study the pricing problem for a third-party-logistics (3PL) provider that provides warehousing and transportation services. When customers arrive at the 3PL provider, they specify the delivery dates for their freight, and before the specified delivery dates, their freight is stocked in the 3PL provider’s warehouse. We propose a dynamic pricing strategy (DPS) and develop a stochastic-nonlinear-programming (SNLP) model which computes the optimal freight rates for different delivery dates incorporating the 3PL provider’s current holding cost and available transportation capacity for each route. As customers are heterogeneous in their valuations and price sensitivities for delivery dates, and the distributions of the customers’ delivery date preferences are unknown to the 3PL provider, we modify the standard multinomial logit (MNL) function to predict customer choices. Through a simulation experiment, we show that the proposed MNL function can be a good replacement for the mixed MNL function when the mixed MNL function is not applicable. Through simulation we also compare the proposed DPS with a static pricing strategy. We show that with our DPS both the 3PL provider and its customers are better off, and the 3PL provider has different investment incentives for increasing transportation capacity. Our results can be also applied in similar settings that feature holding costs, limited production capacity and delivery-date-sensitive customers.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
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".