MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3122384578 · doi:10.1287/opre.1080.0654

Toward Robust Revenue Management: Competitive Analysis of Online Booking

2009· article· en· W3122384578 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueOperations Research · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOptimization and Search Problems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsCompetitive analysisRevenueOnline algorithmRevenue managementComputer scienceOperations researchUpper and lower boundsPerspective (graphical)Sequence (biology)Control (management)Mathematical optimizationBusinessMicroeconomicsEconomicsAlgorithmMathematicsFinanceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we consider the revenue management problem from the perspective of online algorithms. This approach eliminates the need for both demand forecasts and a risk-neutrality assumption. The competitive ratio of a policy relative to a given input sequence is the ratio of the policy's performance to the offline optimal. Under the online algorithm approach, revenue management policies are evaluated based on the highest competitive ratio they can guarantee. We are able to define lower bounds on the best-possible performance and describe policies that achieve these lower bounds. We address the two-fare problem in greatest detail, but also treat the general multifare problem and the bid-price control problem.

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.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.798
Threshold uncertainty score0.243

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.127
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.269 · 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