MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400011855 · doi:10.18280/jesa.570319

Supplier Selection Analysis for Sand Materials Using AHP in the Indonesian Manufacturing Industry

2024· article· fr· W4400011855 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yulinda Tarigan, Alrido Martha Devano, Fandy Bestario Harlan, Ameer Farhan Mohd Arzaman, Lutfiatun Nadia, Nurulizwa Rashid

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal Européen des Systèmes Automatisés · 2024
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldEngineering
TopicMining Techniques and Economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndonesianSelection (genetic algorithm)Analytic hierarchy processManufacturing engineeringManufacturingBusinessComputer scienceEngineeringOperations researchArtificial intelligenceMarketingLinguisticsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The analysis of supplier selection aims to identify suppliers that best match an organization's specific needs.In the past, an Indonesian manufacturing enterprise relied solely on price as a criterion for selecting suppliers, overlooking other important factors.This study employs a qualitative approach using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) to select suppliers of sand raw materials.A geometric mean algorithm calculates eigenvalues and ranks the suppliers based on various criteria.The evaluation is based on the vendor performance indicator (VPI) criteria, which include quality, cost, lead time, flexibility, and responsiveness.The findings indicate the following global weightings for each supplier: Supplier U (0.224), Supplier V (0.327), Supplier W (0.197), Supplier X (0.123), Supplier Y (0.052), and Supplier Z (0.077).From this assessment, Supplier V is identified as the most suitable vendor for raw sand materials.Consequently, the enterprise should consider selecting Supplier V as its primary supplier.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.341
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal Européen des Systèmes AutomatisésSame topicMining Techniques and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207