MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409603855 · doi:10.61091/jcmcc127b-176

Research on AIGC-based Supply Chain Inventory Demand Forecasting Model and Nonlinear Optimization Strategy

2025· article· en· W4409603855 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial Computing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Manufacturing and Logistics Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSupply chainDemand forecastingNonlinear systemOperations researchComputer scienceEconomicsBusinessEngineeringMarketingPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Supply chain inventory forecasting and control is an integral part of supply chain management system, and it is a focus that industries must pay attention to in their operation and management.In this paper, the supply chain inventory demand forecasting model is constructed from the perspective of supply chain end, combined with the Transformer model in AIGC technology.The DL-Informer model is used to improve the Transformer model, realize the feature fusion of graph convolutional neural network, design and solve the feature graph adjacency matrix and complete the information fusion of each feature subgraph to improve the prediction accuracy.Aiming at the problems faced by supply chain inventory demand forecasting, the traditional algorithm with strong local optimization ability is combined with the genetic algorithm, and the hybrid genetic algorithm (HGA) is proposed to solve the nonlinear optimization problem.In the supply chain inventory forecasting practice, when the forecast length is 12, the MSE, MAE and RMSE index values of this paper's forecasting model are 0.202, 0.174 and 0.416, respectively, which have more stable long-term forecasting performance compared with other models.And in the nonlinear simulation optimization experiments, the HGA algorithm shows good convergence and outstanding optimization effect in the nonlinear problem of supply chain inventory.

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 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 score0.670
Threshold uncertainty score0.889

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.256 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial ComputingSame topicAdvanced Manufacturing and Logistics OptimizationFrench-language works237,207