MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403357373 · doi:10.1080/00207543.2024.2414380

The effect of visibility on forecast and inventory management performance during the COVID-19 pandemic

2024· article· en· W4403357373 on OpenAlexafffund
Kaveh Dehkhoda, Válerie Bélanger, Martin Cousineau

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Production Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicForecasting Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsHEC Montréal
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHEC MontréalInstitut de Valorisation des DonnéesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCentre interuniversitaire de recherche sur les reseaux d'entreprise, la logistique et le transport
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PandemicVisibility2019-20 coronavirus outbreakSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Operations researchComputer scienceOperations managementBusinessGeographyEngineeringVirologyMeteorologyOutbreakMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare facilities faced significant shortages of critical supplies like personal protective equipment, with dire repercussions. This study evaluates the potential role of decreased data visibility on these shortages, analysing different forecasting methods integrated with a periodic review inventory system (i.e. a base stock policy) on semi-simulated data encompassing several visibility issues. The forecasting methods chosen pertain to different data types: Holt and naïve methods are used as demand-based predictors, while a modified epidemiological model utilises pandemic data for demand forecasting. We scrutinise three prevalent data visibility issues through specifically crafted scenarios examining the effects of delayed, temporally aggregated, and erroneous data on system performance. Generally, our research illustrates that data visibility issues have a detrimental impact on the healthcare supply chain's efficacy. Interestingly, the system performance sees an uptick when these issues spur significantly oversized over-forecasts, e.g. when employing an epidemiological compartmental model for predictions.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.038
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.038
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.294
GPT teacher head0.539
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Production ResearchSame topicForecasting Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207