MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408920191 · doi:10.18280/jesa.580205

Framework for the Design of a Demand-Driven MRP (DDMRP) Model from Case Study

2025· article· en· W4408920191 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Juan Carlos Muyulema Allaica, Roberto Bernardo Usca-Veloz, Franklin Reyes-Soriano, Paola Martina Pucha Medina, Jorge Fernando Hidalgo-Hidalgo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal Européen des Systèmes Automatisés · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBusiness Process Modeling and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of the Pacific
KeywordsComputer scienceBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Demand-Driven Material Requirements Planning (DDMRP) represents a significant advancement in the evolution of Material Requirements Planning (MRP) by addressing the challenges of variability in manufacturing environments.Unlike traditional methods that focus on managing variability, DDMRP proactively optimizes production and inventory management by strategically positioning and sizing inventory buffers within complex Bills of Materials (BOMs).This paper aims to achieve three primary objectives: (i) to identify the theoretical foundations for the application of DDMRP through a systematic literature review; (ii) to develop a comprehensive framework outlining key Manufacturing Planning and Control (MPC) systems essential for DDMRP implementation; and (iii) to provide a detailed analysis of the methodology's core components.The research employs the PRISMA statement to enhance the clarity and transparency of the systematic review process.The analysis categorizes the reviewed literature into five critical themes: strategic inventory positioning, safety stock sizing and management, buffer profiles and level determination, and demand-driven planning.The proposed framework uncovers significant gaps in the current literature and highlights valuable opportunities for further research.Additionally, it serves as a guide for policymakers and supply chain professionals, providing insights into the selection of sustainable strategies for improving operational efficiency and responsiveness in supply chain management.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.001

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal Européen des Systèmes AutomatisésSame topicBusiness Process Modeling and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207