Simulation and process mining in a cross-docking system: a case study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The increasing development of the competitive market has forced organisations to make great efforts in the processes of supply, production, and distribution to meet customer demand in the shortest time and at the lowest cost. A cross-docking (CD) system is one of the successful and practical strategies in this field considered by researchers in various fields. Also, business process management plays a key role in continuous improvement and increased productivity. In today’s digital age, due to the ability to record all activities, process mining is an important method to identify the current situation and improve productivity. In this research, a newly established CD belonging to a chain store is studied to improve the current situation, in which different goods enter and then exit after different processes. The purpose of this study is to obtain the optimal number of doors and loaders as sources. First, helping an RFID system, all activities are recorded, and the current situation of the processes is monitored, and then, the real process model is identified using heuristic and inductive miner algorithms. After adapting to the event log by using the simulation process in Arena software, different scenarios are examined, and the best possible case is presented.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".