The joint influence of quality assurance and postponement on a hybrid multi-item manufacturing-delivery decision-making
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present research explores the collective influence of quality assurance and postponement on a hybrid multiproduct replenishing-delivery decision-making. Assume the required multiproduct has a standard (common) component, and our replenishing-delivery model has incorporated a two-phase postponement strategy. The first phase makes all standard components and hires an external supplier to partially provide the required parts to cut short the needed uptime. In contrast, the second phase fabricates the finished multiproduct in sequence. To ensure the desired merchandise quality, we apply a quality-assurance action to the in-house processes to screen and remove scrap items and rework the repairable defects in both stages. Upon completing each merchandise, these products are transported to the customer in n fixed-quantity shipment in fixed-time intervals. We employ math modeling and formulating approaches to gain the overall supply-chain operating expenses comprising subcontracting, fabricating, stock holding, transportation, and customer holding costs. By minimizing system operating expenses, this research determines the optimal replenishing-delivery policy. Lastly, we give a numerical example to demonstrate our study’s applicability and usefulness/capability for facilitating managerial decision-making.
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 | 0.007 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".