MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3160815535

Coordinating the Discount Policies for Retailer, Wholesaler, and Less-than-Truckload Carrier Under Price-Sensitive Demand: A Tri-Level Optimization Approach

2017· article· en· W3160815535 on OpenAlexaff
Ginger Y. Ke, James H. Bookbinder

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicSupply Chain and Inventory Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrder (exchange)HeuristicSupply chainMicroeconomicsService (business)BusinessKey (lock)Service providerService levelOn demandEconomicsIndustrial organizationComputer scienceMarketingCommerceFinance
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quantity discounts have been broadly examined in decisions on the sale or purchase of goods. The analysis of coordinating the discount decisions for the retailer (buyer), the wholesaler (supplier), and the public transportation service provider (Less-Than-Truckload carrier), however, is still in its infancy. In this paper, we develop a tri-level programming approach to coordinate the three supply chain members' decisions on discount policies, when the demand is sensitive to the change in price. Both decentralized and centralized scenarios are examined, and a heuristic algorithm is presented to assist the three parties in establishing their discount schemes in a decentralized environment. Through a series of comprehensive numerical experiments based on the linear demand, we show that the price-sensitivity is a key motivation, for all parties, especially the carrier, to offer discounts. Specifically for the wholesale quantity discount, the data analyses also illustrate the different purposes and corresponding structures for the decentralized and centralized cases. For the former case, the discount is quantity-based, which encourages the buyer to increase the size of each order; while for the latter case, the discount is volume-based, which is used to boost the annual demand. The significant improvements to each party and to the entire supply chain resulting from the discount coordination are also demonstrated under various situations.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicSupply Chain and Inventory ManagementFrench-language works237,207