MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382751234 · doi:10.5267/j.msl.2023.6.004

K-means clustering for optimization of spare parts delivery

2023· article· en· W4382751234 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kaushik D Ramgude, Neela Rajhans

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement Science Letters · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicForecasting Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpare partSupply chainTruckComputer scienceBusinessInventory theoryService (business)Order (exchange)Delivery PerformanceTransport engineeringOperations researchOperations managementProcess managementMarketingEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Transhipment is an important logistics strategy that helps to improve supply chain efficiency and reduce transportation costs. It enables cargo to be transported to multiple destinations using different modes of transportation, such as ships, trains, trucks, and planes. This can help to reduce the overall transportation time and cost, as well as improve inventory management and distribution. In addition to its use in logistics and transportation, transhipment can also be used in other industries such as manufacturing, where it can be used to transfer raw materials or finished products between different facilities or production lines. This research paper examines the role of transhipment in improving the efficiency of spare part delivery systems to the PMPML depots from central workshop Swargate. PMPML has 12 depots in total (including central workshop). In many industries, the supply chain for spare parts is complex, with multiple suppliers, warehouses, and service centres involved. Transhipment, or the transfer of inventory between locations, can help to reduce lead times and improve inventory availability. In this paper, we analyze the impact of transhipment on key performance metrics such as order fulfilment, inventory turnover, and transportation costs. We also discuss the challenges associated with implementing transhipment in spare part delivery systems, including coordination between different parties, data sharing, and system integration.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.077

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.122
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManagement Science LettersSame topicForecasting Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207