MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392910276 · doi:10.32920/25417243.v1

The Incorporation of Cross Hedging Diesel Fuel Into a Single Vendor-buyer Supply Chain Model

2024· preprint· en· W4392910276 on OpenAlexafffund
Anton Kristian Koschany

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicRisk Management in Financial Firms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsSupply chainHedgeVolatility (finance)VendorDiesel fuelBusinessOrder (exchange)Supply chain risk managementEarningsIndustrial organizationSupply chain managementMicroeconomicsEconomicsFinanceService managementMarketingAutomotive engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many supply chains rely on diesel fuel for transportation and other purposes, and must cope with the risk associated with its price volatility, which can affect firms’ earnings and operating costs. This master’s research project summarises studies in the literature to provide an understanding of this problem, both from risk hedging and supply chain perspectives. We then take steps to further the research by modifying the single vendor-buyer supply chain model in order to incorporate the process of cross hedging; identifying and evaluating potential cross hedging instruments for diesel fuel during differing market conditions; and evaluating the realworld effectiveness of cross hedging in the supply chain model by creating three numerical examples, utilizing real-world price data and the determined cross hedging instrument and hedge ratio, in order to determine whether it is worth it for firms to incorporate this type of cross hedging into their supply chain management strategies.

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)0.004
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRisk Management in Financial FirmsFrench-language works237,207