Modélisation et étude d'approches collaboratives dans les réseaux de création de valeur de l'industrie des papiers fins
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pourquoi collaborer -- Comment mettre en oeuvre une collaboration -- Comment favoriser la coordination des opérations -- L'Industrie canadienne des produits forestiers -- Présentation du cas pratique -- Comparaison de quatre approches collaboratives -- Utilisation d'incitatifs pour accroître les profits -- Implantation des approches collaboratives barrières -- Collaboration and Decision Models for a Two-echelon Supply Chain : a Case Study in the Pulp and Paper Industry -- Collaboration approaches and decision models -- Experimental design and numerical study -- Collaboration for a two-echelon supply chain in the pulp and paper industry : the use of incentives to increase profit -- Decision models and case study -- Computational study -- Dynamique des relations interentreprises : Mécanismes, barrières et cas pratique -- Les collaborations interentreprises -- Les stratégies logistiques -- Barrières associées aux stratégies logistiques -- Les incitatifs comme mécanisme de coordination -- Utilisation d'incitatifs pour un cas pratique.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 teacher head, 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".