MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7083576528 · doi:10.1016/j.ifacol.2025.09.249

Generative AI in Supply Chain Resource Orchestration: A Conceptual Perspective

2025· article· en· W7083576528 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueIFAC-PapersOnLine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrchestrationEnablingSupply chainResource (disambiguation)Relevance (law)Supply chain managementResource management (computing)Competitive advantageDynamic capabilities

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI) revolutionizes supply chain management (SCM) by facilitating resource orchestration via predictive analytics, intelligent resource allocation, network synchronization, and ongoing learning. This research relies on Resource Orchestration Theory (ROT) to examine the role of GAI in organizing, integrating, and utilizing resources within SCM. A systematic literature review (SLR) was performed, incorporating findings from 32 research papers to propose a conceptual framework that aligns GAI-enabled capabilities with resource orchestration processes, specifically elucidating how GAI facilitates the structuring, bundling, and leveraging of resources. Then, this proposed paradigm demonstrates the relationship between GAI’s predictive and adaptive capabilities and the essential processes of resource orchestration, offering a systematic method for comprehending its contribution to improving supply chain operations. The results highlight GAI-enabled capacities to enhance decision-making, optimize resource distribution, and bolster supply chain resilience and efficiency. The study improves theoretical understanding by extending the relevance of ROT to digital supply chains and provides practical insights for managers seeking to integrate GAI into supply chain operations. This study identifies GAI as a crucial enabler of competitive advantage in dynamic supply chain environments by integrating technical capabilities with resource management tactics.

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)0.000
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.822
Threshold uncertainty score0.738

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIFAC-PapersOnLineSame topicGeochemistry and Geologic MappingFrench-language works237,207