MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386170118 · doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2023.08.036

Adaptive robust optimization for lot-sizing under yield uncertainty

2023· article· en· W4386170118 on OpenAlexaff
Paula Metzker Soares, Simon Thevenin, Yossiri Adulyasak, Alexandre Dolgui

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Operational Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicSupply Chain and Inventory Management
Canadian institutionsGroup for Research in Decision AnalysisHEC Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematical optimizationRobust optimizationSizingComputer scienceExploitSet (abstract data type)Production (economics)Constraint (computer-aided design)Quadratic equationHolding costMathematicsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

• We provide our contributions from a theoretical to an empirical perspective. • An optimal myopic adaptive robust policy is given for the inventory management problem. • A MILP adaptive robust approximation for the lot-sizing problem is provided. • A column and constraint generation for the adaptive robust lot-sizing problem is provided. • Computer experiments are described, and managerial insights are given. In manufacturing environments, uncertain production yield directly impacts the quality and feasibility of the production planning decisions. This paper investigates the use of adaptive robust optimization to hedge against uncertain yield when determining a production plan, and to react properly when updated information unfolds. We first derive a myopic adaptive robust policy for the inventory management problem, a special case of the lot-sizing problem where the setup and the production costs are omitted. We show that the policy is optimal under mild assumptions. Second, we address a multi-period single-item lot-sizing problem with a backorder and uncertain yield via adaptive robust optimization. We formulate an adaptive robust model based on the budgeted uncertainty set, where we exploit a linear approximation to transform the quadratic constraints into a mixed-integer linear program. We also propose a column and constraint generation algorithm to solve the adaptive model exactly. Finally, we demonstrate the performances of the proposed approaches and the value of the adaptive robust solutions through extensive numerical experiments.

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)0.003
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.262
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.079 · 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

Citations8
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Operational ResearchSame topicSupply Chain and Inventory ManagementFrench-language works237,207