Supply chain coordination with trade credit and price discount with/without environmental considerations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For a supply chain coordination to be effective and profitable, it requires a working mechanism among its members to entice some players to join a partnership. Two of the well-known trade credits that are widely used by businesses are the permissible delay in payments and price discounts. This thesis presents models for coordinating supply chains with both trade credits. The first model investigates the effect of utilizing delay in payments in a two-level (manufacturer-retailer) supply chain. It modifies and analyzes three known models of different production and shipping policies to account for delays in payments; it then compares them and highlights the production policy that performed the best with the total system cost being the performance measure. The second model analyzes the coordination of a three-level (supplier-manufacturer- retailer) supply chain with the delay in payments. It analyzes nine different scenarios of permissible delay among the three players. A simulation study was performed and a thorough analysis of the results was used to identify the limitations of all scenarios and to draw some managerial insights and findings. The third model investigates the effect of coupling permissible delay in payments and price discounts for coordinating a three-level. The analysis considers nine different cases of delay-in-payments along with eight cases of price discounts among the three players in the supply chain, totaling seventy-two cases. The numerical examples and the sensitivity analyses show that the coupling of delay-in- payments and price discounts maximizes the supply chain profit more than when using a single mechanism at a time. The fourth model investigates a two-level supply chain by studying the effects of various scenarios for delay-in-payments when including some environmental costs such as fuel and emissions from manufacturing and transportation. The objective of the model is to optimize the environmental and the economic performance of the supply chain. The results show that delay-in-payments improves the economic and the environmental performance of a supply chain.
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 | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| 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 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.000 |
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.
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".