Inventory planning for self-serve pharmacy kiosks: A fill rate maximization approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In recent years, self-serve kiosks have become increasingly popular due to their 24/7 availability and lower setup and operational costs compared to traditional brick-and-mortar stores. However, the inventory planning for pharmacy kiosks is a challenge due to its limited capacity to store thousands of drugs ordered in various quantities, each with low and sporadic drug demand. In this work, we model the pharmacy kiosk inventory planning problem as a capacitated multiproduct newsvendor problem under fill rate maximization objective. We present a data-driven robust optimization framework where product demand lies within an uncertainty set generated from product clustering. A column-and-constraint generation based solution approach is proposed to solve industry scale instances. The proposed robust framework is tested on actual pharmacy sales data and randomly generated instances with 2000 products. The robust solutions outperform scenario-based stochastic solutions with an increase in out-of-sample fill rate of 5.8%, on average, and of up to 17%. Comparative analysis with profit objective reveals that the fill rate objective results in 17% higher out-of-sample fill rate by compromising 20% in profits, on average.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".