MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4395452180 · doi:10.1007/s10479-024-05903-y

Multi-item order quantity optimization through stochastic goal programing

2024· article· en· W4395452180 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Operations Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptimization and Mathematical Programming
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersQatar University
KeywordsOrder (exchange)Computer scienceStochastic optimizationStochastic programmingMathematical optimizationMathematicsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Managing multi-item economic order quantity (MIEOQ) problems within an uncertain business environment is a critical challenge. Decision-makers, with a comprehensive understanding of organizational goals and risk tolerances, play a pivotal role in this context. However, existing solutions often inadequately consider decision-maker preferences in MIEOQ problem-solving. The literature suggests that integrating the concept of satisfaction function with stochastic goal programming (SGP) can address this issue. However, the existing SGP approaches struggle with the challenge of effective goal setting. Additionally, employing distinct satisfaction functions for each uncertain goal can complicate threshold setting, diminishing their effectiveness. To tackle these challenges, we introduce a straightforward, yet effective approach called aspiration-free goal programming (AFGP) and integrate it with a unified satisfaction function. AFGP operates by minimizing expected values of deviation variables, eliminating the challenging task of goal setting under uncertainty. A unified satisfaction function is a singular metric applied uniformly across multiple goals, offering a consistent framework for evaluating performance across diverse objectives. This integration forms a preference-sensitive framework that not only captures nuanced trade-offs between conflicting objectives but also enhances decision quality and stakeholder satisfaction. By emphasizing the importance of decision-maker’s preferences and addressing identified issues, our research introduces a practical and effective approach for achieving balanced solutions in uncertain MIEOQ environments.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.726
Threshold uncertainty score0.389

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.237
GPT teacher head0.465
Teacher spread0.228 · 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