MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3212101599 · doi:10.5267/j.dsl.2021.9.001

Simulation optimization of an inventory control model for a reverse logistics system

2021· article· en· W3212101599 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hanane Rachih, Fatima Zahra Mhada, Raddouane Chiheb

Bibliographic record

VenueDecision Science Letters · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicSustainable Supply Chain Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRemanufacturingReverse logisticsTabu searchSupply chainComputer scienceGenetic algorithmInventory controlSustainabilityRobustness (evolution)Operations researchRestructuringBusinessEnvironmental economicsOperations managementManufacturing engineeringEconomicsEngineeringMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nowadays, companies are recognizing their primordial roles and responsibilities towards the protection of the environment and save the natural resources. They are focusing on some contemporary activities such as Reverse Logistics which is economically and environmentally viable. However, the integration of such an initiative needs flows restructuring and supply chain management in order to increase sustainability and maximize profits. Under this background, this paper addresses an inventory control model for a reverse logistics system that deals with two separated types of demand, for new products and remanufactured products, with different selling prices. The model consists of a single shared machine between production and remanufacturing operations, while the machine is subject to random failures and repairs. Three stock points respectively for returns, new products and remanufactured products are investigated. Meanwhile, in this paper, a modeling of the problem with Discrete-Event simulation using Arena® was conducted. Regarding the purpose of finding, a near-optimal inventory control policy that minimizes the total cost, an optimization of the model based on Tabu Search and Genetic Algorithms was established. Computational examples and sensitivity analysis were performed in order to compare the results and the robustness of each proposed algorithm. Then the results of the two methods were compared with those of OptQuest® optimization tool.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations25
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDecision Science LettersSame topicSustainable Supply Chain ManagementFrench-language works237,207