MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7112136853

<論文>Risks in Service-Oriented Manufacturing Supply Chains: Current Insights and Implications

2024· article· en· W7112136853 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueInstitutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicSupply Chain Resilience and Risk Management
Canadian institutionsInnovation Cluster (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSupply chainContext (archaeology)Risk managementFuzzy logicContingencyProcess (computing)Fuzzy setGovernment (linguistics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research presents an analysis of the risks associated with the service-oriented manufacturing supply chain based on the contingency theory. It aims to offer a comprehensive overview of the existing information by identifying and categorising diverse hazards into three primary tiers of risk determinants. The present research utilises a generic Risk Breakdown Structure (RBS) as a foundation but focuses on a particular industrial context to examine and validate hazards identified in the existing literature. Leveraging the Fuzzy Delphi-Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) technique, information was gathered from 50 local construction specialists, including government representatives, consultants, contractors, and clients. We propose formulating a comprehensive definition for a service-oriented manufacturing supply chain grounded on its fundamental significance within the contemporary economic landscape. Researchers and practitioners can consider a comprehensive list of seven risk categories: demand, supply, operations, information, finance, time (delays), and external sources (human-made or natural-related). These categories provide valuable insights into potential risks associated with various aspects of a given context. This study is one of the first research endeavours to provide the notion and attributes of the service-oriented manufacturing supply chain. The Fuzzy technique is employed to produce comprehensive and industry-specific Resource Breakdown Structures (RBSs) inside a singular investigation.

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)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0010.002
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInstitutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB)Same topicSupply Chain Resilience and Risk ManagementFrench-language works237,207