MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415757702 · doi:10.1007/s40747-025-02057-7

Smart supplier selection using N-cubic fuzzy aggregation: a case study in agricultural manufacturing

2025· article· en· W4415757702 on OpenAlexaff
Xi Chen, Adnan Khurshid, Tahir Abbas, Muhammad Gulistan, Mohammed M. Ali Al-Shamiri, Muhammad Azhar

Bibliographic record

VenueComplex & Intelligent Systems · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMulti-Criteria Decision Making
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersKing Khalid University
KeywordsComputational intelligenceFuzzy logicRobustness (evolution)Selection (genetic algorithm)Ranking (information retrieval)Fuzzy setCloud computingProduction (economics)Set (abstract data type)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rapid evolution of communication and information technologies—such as cloud computing, the Internet of Things (IoT), big data analytics, and machine learning—has revolutionized traditional manufacturing, giving rise to intelligent and interconnected production ecosystems. These technological advancements not only streamline production processes but also reshape supplier selection strategies by incorporating both conventional and sustainability-oriented evaluation criteria. In light of these developments, this study proposes a novel multi-criteria group decision-making (MCGDM) framework for supplier selection under the N-Cubic Fuzzy Set (NCFS) environment. NCFSs offer a robust mathematical structure for capturing uncertain, vague, and imprecise information, particularly within the interval $$[-1 ,0]$$ , making them highly suitable for complex, real-world decision-making scenarios. To facilitate effective aggregation of expert judgments, three advanced aggregation operators are introduced: the N-Cubic Generalized Fuzzy Weighted Average (NCGFWA), the N-Cubic Generalized Fuzzy Ordered Weighted Average (NCGFOWA), and the N-Cubic Generalized Fuzzy Hybrid Weighted Average (NCGFHWA). These operators are designed to systematically consolidate the preferences of multiple decision-makers and produce a reliable ranking of potential suppliers. The proposed methodology is validated through a real-world case study involving a manufacturer of agricultural machinery and implements. The results demonstrate the practical effectiveness, flexibility, and robustness of the NCFS-based framework in supporting supplier selection within the paradigm of smart manufacturing.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.261
GPT teacher head0.442
Teacher spread0.181 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComplex & Intelligent SystemsSame topicMulti-Criteria Decision MakingFrench-language works237,207