MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400356410 · doi:10.3389/frsus.2024.1264461

Word-of-mouth in agent-based simulation model of reverse logistics

2024· article· en· W4400356410 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Alexandre Labelle, Jean‐Marc Frayret

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Sustainability · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicInnovation Diffusion and Forecasting
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalTransport Canada
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaPolytechnique Montréal
KeywordsReverse logisticsComputer scienceWord (group theory)Word of mouthNatural language processingArtificial intelligenceBusinessLinguisticsAdvertisingSupply chainMarketingPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Agent-based modeling and simulation is a method well suited for studying individual behavior and interactions among members of a population connected by social networks. Although the development of such simulation models can be relatively complex, it is even more challenging to develop models that are empirically valid. In the case of reverse logistics, the sophisticated and difficult-to-predict behavior of consumers must be modeled. In this paper, an agent-based simulation model of consumer behavior and interactions was configured to conduct a case study of the voluntary deposit collection program for wine bottles in the Val-Saint-François region of Quebec. As this collection program was officially launched in 2019, two empirical samples were obtained to test the validity of the model and study how social interactions such as word of mouth contributes to the success of the collection program. The first sample represents the amount of glass collected during the last 26 weeks of 2019, while the second sample covers the first 13 weeks of 2020. Having observed an increase in collection rates between 2019 and 2020, word of mouth was introduced into the model to explain this phenomenon. Statistical tests show that the model is indeed valid with the inclusion of diffusion of awareness, as the simulation results are significantly consistent with the empirical data. The validation of the model demonstrates the viability of using multiple heterogeneous data-sources to configure a simulation model based on the Theory of Planned Behavior without using Structural Equation Modeling.

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)0.001
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 score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.093

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.286 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in SustainabilitySame topicInnovation Diffusion and ForecastingFrench-language works237,207