MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4376647954 · doi:10.46254/an12.20220097

Artificial Intelligence Demand Forecasting Techniques in Supply Chain Management: A Systematic Literature Review

2023· article· en· W4376647954 on OpenAlexafffund
Saad El Marjani, Safae Er-Rbib, Loubna Benabbou

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicForecasting Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Rimouski
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDemand forecastingSupply chainSupply chain managementComputer scienceDemand managementArtificial intelligenceOperations researchBusinessEngineeringEconomicsMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Demand forecasting is one of the vital elements of the supply chain management (SCM).It is in constant need of development and improvement given its critical impact on the supply chain.Forecasting the demand should be performed to answer the needs of the customers using efficiently the available resources.We provide in this paper some overviews based on a systematic analysis of the related literature.The paper addresses different techniques and aeras of artificial intelligence (AI) adopted to determine and enhance the demand forecasting in SCM.The research aims at identifying AI techniques that can improve supply chain practices and fill the gaps in some interesting SCM fields, namely: Marketing, Production, Logistics and Supply Chain.We disclosed the most important aspects of the review such as: AI algorithms applied to different fields of the supply chain; potential AI techniques frequently used in demand forecasting and the different related subfields susceptible to be treated with these techniques.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0110.015
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.158
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicForecasting Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207