Feature-Based Inventory Control with Censored Demand
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Problem definition: We study stochastic periodic-review inventory systems with lost sales, where the decision maker has no access to the true demand distribution a priori and can only observe historical sales data (referred to as censored demand) and feature information about the demand. In an inventory system, excess demand is unobservable because of inventory constraints, and sales data alone cannot fully recover the true demand. Meanwhile, feature information about the demand is abundant to assist inventory decisions. We incorporate features for inventory systems with censored demand. Methodology/results: We propose two feature-based inventory algorithms called the feature-based adaptive inventory algorithm and the dynamic shrinkage algorithm. Both algorithms are based on the stochastic gradient descent method. We measure the performance of the proposed algorithms through the average expected regret in finite periods: that is, the difference between the cost of our algorithms and that of a clairvoyant optimal policy with access to information, which is acting optimally. We show that the average expected cost incurred under both algorithms converges to the clairvoyant optimal cost at the rate of [Formula: see text] for the perishable inventory case and [Formula: see text] for the nonperishable inventory case. The feature-based adaptive inventory algorithm results in high volatility in the stochastic gradients, which hampers the initial performance of regret. The dynamic shrinkage algorithm uses a shrinkage parameter to adjust the gradients, which significantly improves the initial performance. Managerial implications: This paper considers feature information. The idea of dynamic shrinkage for the stochastic gradient descent method builds on a fundamental insight known as the bias-variance trade-off. Our research shows the importance of incorporating the bias-variance in a dynamic environment for inventory systems with feature information. Funding: W. T. Huh acknowledges support from the NSERC Discovery Grants [Grant RGPIN 2020-04213] and the Canada Research Chair Program. The work of Y. Rong was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China [Grants 72025201, 72331006, and 72221001]. Supplemental Material: The online appendix is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.2021.0135 .
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 | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".