Bibliographic record
Abstract
We consider a data-driven newsvendor problem, where one has access to past demand data and the associated feature information. We solve the problem by estimating the target conditional quantile function using a deep neural network (DNN). The remarkable representational power of DNNs allows our framework to incorporate or approximate various extant data-driven models. We provide theoretical guarantees in terms of excess risk bounds for the DNN solution characterized by the network structure and sample size in a nonasymptotic manner, which justify the applicability of DNNs in relevant contexts. Specifically, the convergence rate of the excess risk bound with respect to the sample size increases in the smoothness of the target quantile function but decreases in the dimension of feature variables. This rate can be further accelerated when the target function possesses a composite structure. In particular, our theoretical framework can be extended to accommodate data-dependent scenarios, where the data-generating process could be time-dependent but not necessarily identical over time. Building on our theoretical results, we provide further managerial insights and practical guidance through simulation studies. Finally, we apply the DNN method to a real-world data set obtained from a food supermarket. Our numerical experiments demonstrate that (1) the DNN method consistently outperforms alternatives across a wide range of cost parameters, and (2) it exhibits good performance when the sample size is either very large or relatively limited. This paper was accepted by Jeannette Song, operations management. Funding: This work was supported by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada [Grant RGPIN-2021-04295]; the National Natural Science Foundation of China [Project: Data-Driven Operations Analytics Methods]; the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities, Peking University; the General Research Fund of the Hong Kong Research Grants Council [Grant 15305523]; and the Research Fund of the Hong Kong Polytechnic University [Grant P0048718]. Supplemental Material: The online appendix and data files are available at https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2023.03157 .
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".