US20080027837A1 - Computer Implemented System for Determining a Distribution Policy for a Single Period Inventory System, Optimization Application Therefor, and Method Therefor, and Decision Support Tool for Facilitating User Determination of a Distribution Policy for a Single Period Inventory System - Google Patents
Computer Implemented System for Determining a Distribution Policy for a Single Period Inventory System, Optimization Application Therefor, and Method Therefor, and Decision Support Tool for Facilitating User Determination of a Distribution Policy for a Single Period Inventory System Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- US20080027837A1 US20080027837A1 US11/838,614 US83861407A US2008027837A1 US 20080027837 A1 US20080027837 A1 US 20080027837A1 US 83861407 A US83861407 A US 83861407A US 2008027837 A1 US2008027837 A1 US 2008027837A1
- Authority
- US
- United States
- Prior art keywords
- single period
- inventory system
- period inventory
- expected
- locations
- Prior art date
- Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
- Abandoned
Links
- 238000009826 distribution Methods 0.000 title claims abstract description 32
- 238000000034 method Methods 0.000 title claims abstract description 21
- 238000005457 optimization Methods 0.000 title abstract description 3
- 239000002131 composite material Substances 0.000 claims description 10
- 239000013598 vector Substances 0.000 claims description 7
- 239000011159 matrix material Substances 0.000 description 9
- 238000005315 distribution function Methods 0.000 description 4
- 238000010586 diagram Methods 0.000 description 3
- 230000006870 function Effects 0.000 description 3
- 230000001186 cumulative effect Effects 0.000 description 2
- 230000014509 gene expression Effects 0.000 description 2
- 230000005540 biological transmission Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000001364 causal effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000004891 communication Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000001143 conditioned effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000001419 dependent effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 235000013399 edible fruits Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 230000000694 effects Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000012986 modification Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000004048 modification Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000001932 seasonal effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000004088 simulation Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000005309 stochastic process Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000006467 substitution reaction Methods 0.000 description 1
- 235000013311 vegetables Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 230000003442 weekly effect Effects 0.000 description 1
Images
Classifications
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
- G06Q10/00—Administration; Management
- G06Q10/06—Resources, workflows, human or project management; Enterprise or organisation planning; Enterprise or organisation modelling
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
- G06Q10/00—Administration; Management
- G06Q10/06—Resources, workflows, human or project management; Enterprise or organisation planning; Enterprise or organisation modelling
- G06Q10/063—Operations research, analysis or management
- G06Q10/0631—Resource planning, allocation, distributing or scheduling for enterprises or organisations
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
- G06Q10/00—Administration; Management
- G06Q10/06—Resources, workflows, human or project management; Enterprise or organisation planning; Enterprise or organisation modelling
- G06Q10/063—Operations research, analysis or management
- G06Q10/0631—Resource planning, allocation, distributing or scheduling for enterprises or organisations
- G06Q10/06315—Needs-based resource requirements planning or analysis
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
- G06Q10/00—Administration; Management
- G06Q10/08—Logistics, e.g. warehousing, loading or distribution; Inventory or stock management
- G06Q10/087—Inventory or stock management, e.g. order filling, procurement or balancing against orders
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
- G06Q20/00—Payment architectures, schemes or protocols
- G06Q20/08—Payment architectures
- G06Q20/20—Point-of-sale [POS] network systems
- G06Q20/203—Inventory monitoring
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
- G06Q30/00—Commerce
- G06Q30/02—Marketing; Price estimation or determination; Fundraising
- G06Q30/0201—Market modelling; Market analysis; Collecting market data
- G06Q30/0202—Market predictions or forecasting for commercial activities
Definitions
- the invention is in the field of determining distribution policies for single period inventory systems.
- a ij F( ⁇ ij ,D ij ) where F is the cumulative probability distribution function (cdf) of demand for the i th consumer item at the j th location, and ⁇ ij and D ij are its mean demand and draw, respectively.
- the probability distribution function in the discrete case and the probability density function in the continuous case are both denoted by the letter “f”.
- Mean demands ⁇ ij for a consumer item at a location over time are presupposed to be the outcome of a stochastic process which can be simulated by a forecast model whilst the demand X ij for an i th consumer item at a j th location of a single period inventory system at a future point in time is a random variable with a conditional probability distribution conditioned on its mean demand ⁇ ij at that point in time.
- a mean demand matrix ⁇ is a matrix of mean demands ⁇ ij .
- Draw D ij is an industry term referring to the delivered quantity of an i th consumer item to a j th location of a single period inventory system.
- a draw matrix D is a matrix of draws D ij .
- SS ij max ⁇ 0, D ij ⁇ ij ⁇ .
- Single period inventory systems are largely concerned with consumer items having a limited shelf life at the end of which an item loses most, if not all, of its consumer value, and the stock of which is not replenished to prevent an occurrence of a sellout.
- consumer items can include perishable goods, for example, fruit, vegetables, flowers, and the like, and fixed lifetime goods, for example, printed media publications, namely, daily newspapers, weeklies, monthlies, and the like.
- Two common problems of single period inventory systems are known in the industry as the so-called “newsvendor” problem, i.e., the sale of the same item throughout a multi-location single period inventory system and the so-called “knapsack” problem, i.e., the sale of different items at the same location.
- One computer implemented approach for calculating a demand forecast involves defining a so-called demand forecast tree capable of being graphically represented by a single top level node with at least two branches directly emanating therefrom, each branch having at least one further node.
- the demand forecast is computed on the basis of historical sales data typically associated with bottom level nodes of a demand forecast tree by a forecast engine capable of determining a mathematical simulation model for a demand process.
- a forecast engine employing statistical seasonal causal time series models of count data is commercially available from Demantra Ltd, Israel, under the name DemantraTM Demand Planner.
- One exemplary demand forecast application is the media distribution problem, namely, determining the number of copies of different daily newspapers to be delivered daily to different locations to minimize two mutually conflicting indices commonly quantified for evaluating the efficacy of a distribution policy for a newspaper: the frequency of sellouts, and the number of returns both typically expressed in percentage terms.
- a draw for a newspaper at a location for a given day is greater than its demand forecast at that location for that day so as to reduce the probability of a sellout but with the inherent penalty that returns will be greater.
- safety stocks are allocated to locations to ensure a predetermined availability level for a given demand probability function to achieve a reasonable balance between expected returns and expected occurrences of sellouts.
- locations are sorted into one of several classes depending on the average number of copies sold, each class being assigned a different availability level, say, 70%, 80%, and the like.
- the present invention provides a novel computer implemented system for determining a distribution policy for a single period inventory system on the basis of performance metrics, for example, returns, sellout, and stockout other than the hitherto employed availability metric.
- performance metrics for example, returns, sellout, and stockout other than the hitherto employed availability metric.
- the present invention is based on the notion that a distribution policy should allocate draw units on the basis of relative merit in accordance with an allocation decision criterion subject to one or more constraints rather than in some arbitrary absolute fashion.
- the choice of the most appropriate allocation decision criterion coupled with one or more constraints for a single period inventory system is highly dependent on characteristics of the single period inventory system in question, for example, the frequency distribution of the mean demands at its nodes, amongst others, and a business objective.
- the preferred allocation decision criteria of the present invention can be divided into two groups as follows:
- Group I consists of simple allocation decision criteria, including inter alia:
- Group II consists of weighted composite allocation decision criteria each having two components oppositely acting upon the draw matrix D required to yield a predetermined business objective expressed in terms of an expected returns percentage (% ER) or an expected percentage of a parameter associated with occurrences of sellouts of all m consumer items at all n locations of a single period inventory system.
- the parameter associated with occurrences of sellouts may be either the number of sellouts of all m consumer items at all n locations of a single period inventory system in which case the allocation decision criterion is as follows:
- D 0 ⁇ .
- the latter criterion is conceptually more valid than the former criterion since the two parameters “returns” and “stockouts” have the same dimensions, namely, units of consumer items, which is not the dimension of sellouts. But this notwithstanding, it is envisaged that the former sellout criterion will gain more acceptance than the latter stockout criterion since expected sellout percentages rather than expected stockout percentages are more traditional in the art of single period inventory systems.
- the simplest approach is to allocate additional draw units one by one starting from an initial draw allocation, say, equal to the mean demand matrix. But in the case of allocating a predetermined total draw quantity ⁇ D ij or total predetermined safety stock quantity Q, it may be allocated with less iterations if it is initially allocated between the locations of a single period inventory system, say, in accordance with a predetermined availability at each location, and thereafter the initial draw allocation is fine-tuned to optimal allocations at each location in accordance with a selected allocation decision criterion by so-called pairwise switching.
- the present invention also provides a computer implemented Decision Support Tool for graphically displaying the expected returns percentages % ER for a multitude of expected returns percentages against their corresponding minimal expected sellout percentages % ESO, or vice versa.
- the Decision Support Tool can preferably graphically display expected returns percentages % ER for a multitude of expected returns percentages against their corresponding minimal expected stockout percentages % EST, or vice versa.
- FIG. 1 is a pictorial representation showing a demand forecast tree for computing demand forecast information for five different perishable consumer items
- FIG. 2 is a table showing historical sales data associated with the demand forecast tree of FIG. 1 ;
- FIG. 3 is a block diagram of a computer implemented system for determining a distribution policy for a single period inventory system, and including a Decision Support Tool for facilitating user determination of a distribution policy for a single period inventory system;
- FIG. 4 is a pictorial representation of a simple single period inventory system having three locations for draw allocation in accordance with the present invention
- FIG. 5 is a flow chart of a method for determining a distribution policy for a single period inventory system in accordance with the present invention
- FIG. 6 is a flow chart showing the steps of a method for re-allocating a predetermined draw to the locations of a single period inventory system based on maximal incremental availability in accordance with a first preferred embodiment of the method of FIG. 5 ;
- FIG. 7 is a table summarizing the results of the iterations for re-allocating the combined total draw of the demand forecast and 15 safety stock units between the locations of the single period inventory system of FIG. 4 in accordance with the method of FIG. 6 ;
- FIG. 8 is a flow chart similar to the flow chart of FIG. 6 but for the one-by-one allocation of a predetermined draw to the locations of a single period inventory system in accordance with a second preferred embodiment of the method of FIG. 5 ;
- FIG. 9 is a table similar to the table of FIG. 7 except in accordance with the method of FIG. 8 for the one-by-one allocation of up to 20 safety stock units;
- FIG. 10 is a flow chart showing the steps of a method in accordance with the present invention for determining a distribution policy for a single period inventory system using a weighted composite allocation decision criterion;
- FIG. 11 is a table summarizing the minimal expected sellout percentages (% ESO) for a multitude of expected returns percentages (% ER) for allocating draw units to the locations of the single period inventory system of FIG. 4 in accordance with the method of FIG. 10 together with their corresponding draw vectors D; and
- FIG. 12 is a graph showing the results of the table of FIG. 11 for facilitating user determination of the distribution policy for a single period inventory system.
- FIG. 1 shows an exemplary demand forecast tree 1 having a single top level node (00) with five branches A, B, C, D and E for correspondingly representing the sale of Item I (top level-1 node (10)) at Locations 1 and 2 (bottom level nodes (11) and (21)), Item II (top level-1 node (20)) at Locations 1 and 3 (bottom level nodes (21) and (23)), Item III (top level-1 node (30)) at Locations 1, 2 and 3 (bottom level nodes (31), (32) and (33)), Item IV (top level-1 node (40)) also at Locations 1, 2 and 3 (bottom level nodes (41), (42) and (43)); and Item V (top level-1 node (50)) at Location 1 (bottom level node (51)) only.
- FIG. 2 shows an exemplary table 2 containing historical sales data for Item I at the bottom level nodes (11) and (12). Similar tables exist for the sale of the other items at their respective locations.
- FIG. 3 shows a computer implemented system 3 with a processor 4 , memory 6 , a user interface 7 , including suitable input devices, for example, a keypad, a mouse, and the like, and output means, for example, a screen, a printer, and the like, with other computer components for enabling operation of the system including result analysis.
- the computer implemented system 3 includes a database 8 for storing historical time series of sales information of items at locations, a forecast engine 9 for forecasting the mean demand ⁇ ij for each i th perishable consumer item at each j th location on the basis of the historical sales data, and an optimization application 11 for determining the distribution policy for a single period inventory system subject to one or more constraints.
- the computer implemented system 3 also includes a Decision Support Tool (DST) 12 for facilitating user determination of a distribution policy for a single period inventory system.
- DST Decision Support Tool
- the computer implemented system 3 may be implemented as illustrated and described in commonly assigned co-pending U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/058,830 entitled “Computer Implemented Method and System for Demand Forecast Applications”, the contents of which are incorporated herein by reference. Whilst the present invention is being described in the context of a fully functional computer implemented system, it is capable of being distributed in as a program product in a variety of forms, and the present invention applies equally regardless of the particular type of signal bearing media used to carry out distribution. Examples of such media include recordable type media, e.g., CD-ROM and transmission type media, e.g., digital communication links.
- demand at Locations 1, 2 and 3 are assumed to have a Poisson probability distribution
- ER ( ⁇ ij ,D j ) D j f ( ⁇ j ,D j ⁇ 1)+( D j ⁇ j ) F ( ⁇ j ,D j ⁇ 2)
- EST ( ⁇ j ,D j ) D j f ( ⁇ j ,D j )+( ⁇ j ⁇ D j )(1 ⁇ F ( ⁇ j ,D j ⁇ 1))
- f(•) is the Poisson probability distribution function (pdf)
- F(•) is the Poisson cumulative probability distribution function (cdf) for the demand for the consumer item at the j th location
- ⁇ j and D j are respectively the mean demand value and the draw at that location.
- the use of the present invention for determining the distribution policy for the single period inventory system 13 is now described with reference to FIGS. 6-9 in connection with the first simple allocation decision criterion, namely, maximum incremental availability as given by max j ⁇ F( ⁇ j ,D j +1) ⁇ F( ⁇ j ,D j ) ⁇ subject to one or more of the following constraints: ⁇ SS j ⁇ Q % ER( ⁇ ,D) ⁇ r; % ESO( ⁇ ,D) ⁇ e; % EST( ⁇ ,D) ⁇ s; a j ⁇ D j ⁇ b j ; and A ⁇ D j ⁇ B.
- the use of the present invention as exemplified in FIGS. 6-10 can be equally extended to the other simple allocation decision criterion (ii) to (iv) by substitution of their corresponding expressions into the blocks entitled Criterion and Objective in the flow diagrams of FIGS. 6 and 8 .
- the table of FIG. 9 shows the incremental effect of one-by-one allocation of safety stock units to the Locations 1, 2 and 3, the column entitled “winning location” indicating which Location 1, 2 or 3 receives the next additional safety stock unit on the basis of its incremental availability being the greatest at any given prevailing draw allocation D c .
- the table of FIG. 9 shows the incremental effect of one-by-one allocation of safety stock units to the Locations 1, 2 and 3, the column entitled “winning location” indicating which Location 1, 2 or 3 receives the next additional safety stock unit on the basis of its incremental availability being the greatest at any given prevailing draw allocation D c .
- FIG. 11 shows the results for repetitions of the method set out in the flow diagram of FIG. 10 for different expected returns percentage constraints % ER( ⁇ ,D) ⁇ r at intervals of about 2% to calculate their corresponding minimal expected sellout percentages % ESO.
- the DST 12 graphically shows these results (see FIG. 12 ) for enabling a user to select a draw vector D, thereby determining the draw allocation between the Locations 1, 2 and 3.
- This approach can be repeated for a multitude of different expected sellout percentage constraints % ESO( ⁇ ,D) ⁇ e, say, at intervals of 5%. Also, this approach may be repeated using the second weighted composite allocation decision criterion based on stockouts rather than sellouts.
Abstract
Description
- This application is a Divisional of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/407,201, filed on Apr. 7, 2003, which claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/370,143, filed on Apr. 8, 2002, each of which is incorporated by reference in its entirety for all purposes.
- The invention is in the field of determining distribution policies for single period inventory systems.
- The following terms listed alphabetically together with their acronyms are employed in the description and claims of this application with respect to the present invention:
- Availability Aij, and System Availability Percentage % SA
- Availability Aij is an industry term referring to the probability of completely satisfying the demand for an ith consumer item where i=1, 2, . . . , m at a jth location where j=1, 2, . . . , n of a single period inventory system without an occurrence of a sellout due to insufficient draw at that location. In mathematical terms, Aij=F(λij,Dij) where F is the cumulative probability distribution function (cdf) of demand for the ith consumer item at the jth location, and λij and Dij are its mean demand and draw, respectively. The probability distribution function in the discrete case and the probability density function in the continuous case are both denoted by the letter “f”. The System Availability Percentage % SA for a single period inventory system is given by % SA=1000ΣΣAij/mn=100−% ESO.
- Demand Xij, Mean Demand λi, and Mean Demand Matrix λ
- The demand process for a consumer item at a location has a random but non-stationary nature, and therefore cannot be subjected to ensemble inferences based on a single realization. Mean demands λij for a consumer item at a location over time are presupposed to be the outcome of a stochastic process which can be simulated by a forecast model whilst the demand Xij for an ith consumer item at a jth location of a single period inventory system at a future point in time is a random variable with a conditional probability distribution conditioned on its mean demand λij at that point in time. A mean demand matrix λ is a matrix of mean demands λij.
- Distribution Policy
- A distribution policy is the delivered quantities of each ith consumer item where i=1, 2, . . . , m at each jth location where j=1, 2, . . . , n of a single period inventory system in accordance with a predetermined business strategy.
- Draw Dij, and Draw Matrix D
- Draw Dij is an industry term referring to the delivered quantity of an ith consumer item to a jth location of a single period inventory system. A draw matrix D is a matrix of draws Dij.
- Returns R(λij,Dij), Total Expected Returns ER(λ,D), and Expected Returns Percentage % ER
- Returns R(λij,Dij) is an industry term referring to the number of unsold items of an ith consumer item at a jth location of a single period inventory system, and is given by R(λij,Dij)=max(Dij−λij,0) where Dij, Xij, and Xij are the ith consumer item's draw, demand and mean demand, respectively, at the jth location. The total expected returns ER at all n locations of a single period inventory system is given by ER(λ,D)=ΣΣER(λij,Dij) where ER(λij,Dij) is the expected value of R(λij,Dij). The expected returns percentage % ER of a distribution policy for a single period inventory system is given by % ER(λ,D)=100ER(λ,D)/ΣΣDij=100−% ES(λ,D).
- Safety Stock SSi and Total Safety Stock Q
- For the purpose of the present invention, safety stock SSi refers to the difference between an actual draw of an ith consumer item at a jth location of a single period inventory system and its demand forecast at that location, namely, SSij=Dij−λij, and therefore can assume positive or negative values. This is in contradistinction to the traditional industry definition of safety stock, namely, SSij=max{0, Dij−λij}. The total safety stock Q of all m consumer items at all n locations of a single period inventory system is given by Q=ΣΣSSij.
- Sales S(λij,Dij), Total Expected Sales ES(λ,D), and Expected Sales Percentage % ES
- Sales S(λij,Dij) refers to the number of sold items of an ith consumer item at a jth location of a single period inventory system as upper bounded by the draw Dij at that location for that consumer item at each point in time, and is given by S(λij,Dij)=min(Dij,Xij)=Dij−R(λij,Dij) where Dij, Xij, and λij are the ith consumer item's draw, demand, and mean demand, respectively, at the jth location. The total expected sales ES(λ,D) of all m consumer items at all n locations of a single period inventory system is given by ES(λ,D)=ΣΣES(λij,Dij) where ES(λij,Dij) is the expected value of S(λij,Dij). The expected sales percentage % ES of a distribution policy for a single period inventory system is given by % ES(λ,D)=100ES(λ,D)/ΣΣDij=100−% ER(λ,D).
- Sellout SO(λij,Dij), Expected Number of Sellouts ESO(λij,Dij), Total Expected Number of Sellouts ESO(λ,D), and Expected Sellout Percentage % ESO
- Sellout SO(λij,Dij) is an industry term referring to an occurrence of demand being greater than a delivered quantity of an ith consumer item at a jth location of a single period inventory system, namely, SO(λij,Dij)=δ(Dij<Xij) where δ is a binary indicator function:
where Dij, Xij, and λij are the ith consumer item's draw, demand, and mean demand, respectively, at that the jth location. The expected number of sellouts ESO(λij,Dij) for an ith consumer item at a jth location of a single period inventory system is given by ESO(λij,Dij)=P(Xij>Dij)=1−F(λij,Dij). The total expected number of sellouts of all m consumer items at all n locations of a single period inventory system is given by ESO(λ,D)=ΣΣESO(λij,Dij)=mn−ΣΣF(λij,Dij). The expected sellout percentage (% ESO) of a distribution policy for a single period inventory system is given by % ESO(λ,D)=100ESO(λ,D)/mn=100−% SA.
Single Period Inventory Systems - Single period inventory systems are largely concerned with consumer items having a limited shelf life at the end of which an item loses most, if not all, of its consumer value, and the stock of which is not replenished to prevent an occurrence of a sellout. Such consumer items can include perishable goods, for example, fruit, vegetables, flowers, and the like, and fixed lifetime goods, for example, printed media publications, namely, daily newspapers, weeklies, monthlies, and the like. Two common problems of single period inventory systems are known in the industry as the so-called “newsvendor” problem, i.e., the sale of the same item throughout a multi-location single period inventory system and the so-called “knapsack” problem, i.e., the sale of different items at the same location.
- Stockout ST(λij,Dij), Expected Stockout EST(λij,Dij), Total Expected Stockout EST(λ,D), and Expected Stockout Percentage % EST
- Stockout ST(λij,Dij) is the quantity of unsatisfied demand for an ith consumer item at a jth location of a single period inventory system, and is given by ST(λij,Dij)=max(Xij−Dij,0)=Xij−S(λij,Dij) where Dij, Xij and λij are the ith consumer item's draw, demand, and mean demand, respectively, at the jth location. The total expected stockout EST(λ,D) of all m consumer items at all n locations of a single period inventory system is given by EST(λ,D)=ΣΣEST(λij,Dij) where EST(λij,Dij) is the expected value of ST(λij,Dij). The expected stockout percentage % EST for a distribution policy is given by % EST(λ,D)=100EST(λ,D)/ΣΣDij.
- One computer implemented approach for calculating a demand forecast involves defining a so-called demand forecast tree capable of being graphically represented by a single top level node with at least two branches directly emanating therefrom, each branch having at least one further node. The demand forecast is computed on the basis of historical sales data typically associated with bottom level nodes of a demand forecast tree by a forecast engine capable of determining a mathematical simulation model for a demand process. One such forecast engine employing statistical seasonal causal time series models of count data is commercially available from Demantra Ltd, Israel, under the name Demantra™ Demand Planner.
- One exemplary demand forecast application is the media distribution problem, namely, determining the number of copies of different daily newspapers to be delivered daily to different locations to minimize two mutually conflicting indices commonly quantified for evaluating the efficacy of a distribution policy for a newspaper: the frequency of sellouts, and the number of returns both typically expressed in percentage terms. It is common practice in the industry that a draw for a newspaper at a location for a given day is greater than its demand forecast at that location for that day so as to reduce the probability of a sellout but with the inherent penalty that returns will be greater. In the case of distribution policies for newspapers, safety stocks are allocated to locations to ensure a predetermined availability level for a given demand probability function to achieve a reasonable balance between expected returns and expected occurrences of sellouts. Moreover, it is common practice that locations are sorted into one of several classes depending on the average number of copies sold, each class being assigned a different availability level, say, 70%, 80%, and the like.
- Broadly speaking, the present invention provides a novel computer implemented system for determining a distribution policy for a single period inventory system on the basis of performance metrics, for example, returns, sellout, and stockout other than the hitherto employed availability metric. In contradistinction to prevailing distribution policy practice which effectively regards each location of a single period inventory system as an isolated entity, the present invention is based on the notion that a distribution policy should allocate draw units on the basis of relative merit in accordance with an allocation decision criterion subject to one or more constraints rather than in some arbitrary absolute fashion. The choice of the most appropriate allocation decision criterion coupled with one or more constraints for a single period inventory system is highly dependent on characteristics of the single period inventory system in question, for example, the frequency distribution of the mean demands at its nodes, amongst others, and a business objective.
- The preferred allocation decision criteria of the present invention can be divided into two groups as follows:
- Group I consists of simple allocation decision criteria, including inter alia:
- (i) maximum incremental availability maxi,j {F(λij,Dij+1)−F(λij,Dij)};
- (ii) minimum availability mini,j {F(λij,Dij)};
- (iii) minimum incremental expected return mini,j {ER(λij,Dij+1)−ER(λij,Dij)}; and
- (iv) maximum decremental expected stockout maxi,j {EST(λij,Dij)−EST(λij,Dij+1)};
- each being subject to one or more of the following constraints ΣΣSSij≦Q where Q is the total safety stock threshold for delivery of all m consumer items to all n locations, ΣjSSij≦q1 i where q1 i is the safety stock of the ith consumer item at all locations, ΣiSSij<q2 j where q2 j is the safety stock of all the consumer items at a jth location, % EST(λ,D)≦s where s is a predetermined expected stockout percentage threshold, % ER(λ,D)≦r where r is a predetermined expected return percentage threshold, % ESO(λ,D)≦e where e is a predetermined expected sellout percentage threshold, aij≦Dij≦bij where aij and bij are respectively lower and upper boundaries for a draw of an ith consumer item at a jth location of a single period inventory system; A≦ΣΣDij≦B where A and B are respectively lower and upper boundaries for the draw of all m consumer items at all n locations of a single period inventory system, A1 i≦Σ1Dij≦B1 i where A1 i and B1 j are respectively lower and upper boundaries for the draw of all m consumer items at a jth location of a single period inventory system, and A1 i≦EjDij≦B1 i where A1 i and B1 i are respectively lower and upper boundaries for the draw of a ith consumer items at all n locations of a single period inventory system.
- Group II consists of weighted composite allocation decision criteria each having two components oppositely acting upon the draw matrix D required to yield a predetermined business objective expressed in terms of an expected returns percentage (% ER) or an expected percentage of a parameter associated with occurrences of sellouts of all m consumer items at all n locations of a single period inventory system. The parameter associated with occurrences of sellouts may be either the number of sellouts of all m consumer items at all n locations of a single period inventory system in which case the allocation decision criterion is as follows:
- (v) w1(% ER(λ,D)−% ER(λ,D0))+w2(% ESO(λ,D0)−% ESO(λ,D)) or
- the number of stockouts at all n locations of a single period inventory system in which case the allocation decision criterion is as follows:
- (vi) w1(% ER(λ,D)−% ER(λ,D0))+w2(% EST(λ,D0)−% EST(λ,D))
- where w1 and w2 are weights, and D0 is an initial draw matrix. The weighted composite allocation decision criteria can be subject to one or more of the above mentioned constraints, and also % ER(λ,D)=% ESO(λ,D) in the case of criterion (v), and also % ER(λ,D)=% EST(λ,D) in the case of criterion (vi). Typically D0=λ. In point of fact, the latter criterion is conceptually more valid than the former criterion since the two parameters “returns” and “stockouts” have the same dimensions, namely, units of consumer items, which is not the dimension of sellouts. But this notwithstanding, it is envisaged that the former sellout criterion will gain more acceptance than the latter stockout criterion since expected sellout percentages rather than expected stockout percentages are more traditional in the art of single period inventory systems.
- To reach an optimal allocation of draw units, the simplest approach is to allocate additional draw units one by one starting from an initial draw allocation, say, equal to the mean demand matrix. But in the case of allocating a predetermined total draw quantity ΣΣDij or total predetermined safety stock quantity Q, it may be allocated with less iterations if it is initially allocated between the locations of a single period inventory system, say, in accordance with a predetermined availability at each location, and thereafter the initial draw allocation is fine-tuned to optimal allocations at each location in accordance with a selected allocation decision criterion by so-called pairwise switching.
- In connection with the weighted composite allocation decision criteria (v) and (vi), the present invention also provides a computer implemented Decision Support Tool for graphically displaying the expected returns percentages % ER for a multitude of expected returns percentages against their corresponding minimal expected sellout percentages % ESO, or vice versa. Alternatively, the Decision Support Tool can preferably graphically display expected returns percentages % ER for a multitude of expected returns percentages against their corresponding minimal expected stockout percentages % EST, or vice versa.
- In order to better understand the invention and to see how it can be carried out in practice, preferred embodiments will now be described, by way of non-limiting examples only, with reference to the accompanying drawings in which:
-
FIG. 1 is a pictorial representation showing a demand forecast tree for computing demand forecast information for five different perishable consumer items; -
FIG. 2 is a table showing historical sales data associated with the demand forecast tree ofFIG. 1 ; -
FIG. 3 is a block diagram of a computer implemented system for determining a distribution policy for a single period inventory system, and including a Decision Support Tool for facilitating user determination of a distribution policy for a single period inventory system; -
FIG. 4 is a pictorial representation of a simple single period inventory system having three locations for draw allocation in accordance with the present invention; -
FIG. 5 is a flow chart of a method for determining a distribution policy for a single period inventory system in accordance with the present invention; -
FIG. 6 is a flow chart showing the steps of a method for re-allocating a predetermined draw to the locations of a single period inventory system based on maximal incremental availability in accordance with a first preferred embodiment of the method ofFIG. 5 ; -
FIG. 7 is a table summarizing the results of the iterations for re-allocating the combined total draw of the demand forecast and 15 safety stock units between the locations of the single period inventory system ofFIG. 4 in accordance with the method ofFIG. 6 ; -
FIG. 8 is a flow chart similar to the flow chart ofFIG. 6 but for the one-by-one allocation of a predetermined draw to the locations of a single period inventory system in accordance with a second preferred embodiment of the method ofFIG. 5 ; -
FIG. 9 is a table similar to the table ofFIG. 7 except in accordance with the method ofFIG. 8 for the one-by-one allocation of up to 20 safety stock units; -
FIG. 10 is a flow chart showing the steps of a method in accordance with the present invention for determining a distribution policy for a single period inventory system using a weighted composite allocation decision criterion; -
FIG. 11 is a table summarizing the minimal expected sellout percentages (% ESO) for a multitude of expected returns percentages (% ER) for allocating draw units to the locations of the single period inventory system ofFIG. 4 in accordance with the method ofFIG. 10 together with their corresponding draw vectors D; and -
FIG. 12 is a graph showing the results of the table ofFIG. 11 for facilitating user determination of the distribution policy for a single period inventory system. -
FIG. 1 shows an exemplarydemand forecast tree 1 having a single top level node (00) with five branches A, B, C, D and E for correspondingly representing the sale of Item I (top level-1 node (10)) atLocations 1 and 2 (bottom level nodes (11) and (21)), Item II (top level-1 node (20)) atLocations 1 and 3 (bottom level nodes (21) and (23)), Item III (top level-1 node (30)) atLocations Locations FIG. 2 shows an exemplary table 2 containing historical sales data for Item I at the bottom level nodes (11) and (12). Similar tables exist for the sale of the other items at their respective locations. -
FIG. 3 shows a computer implementedsystem 3 with aprocessor 4,memory 6, auser interface 7, including suitable input devices, for example, a keypad, a mouse, and the like, and output means, for example, a screen, a printer, and the like, with other computer components for enabling operation of the system including result analysis. The computer implementedsystem 3 includes adatabase 8 for storing historical time series of sales information of items at locations, aforecast engine 9 for forecasting the mean demand λij for each ith perishable consumer item at each jth location on the basis of the historical sales data, and anoptimization application 11 for determining the distribution policy for a single period inventory system subject to one or more constraints. The computer implementedsystem 3 also includes a Decision Support Tool (DST) 12 for facilitating user determination of a distribution policy for a single period inventory system. The computer implementedsystem 3 may be implemented as illustrated and described in commonly assigned co-pending U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/058,830 entitled “Computer Implemented Method and System for Demand Forecast Applications”, the contents of which are incorporated herein by reference. Whilst the present invention is being described in the context of a fully functional computer implemented system, it is capable of being distributed in as a program product in a variety of forms, and the present invention applies equally regardless of the particular type of signal bearing media used to carry out distribution. Examples of such media include recordable type media, e.g., CD-ROM and transmission type media, e.g., digital communication links. - The present invention will now be exemplified for an exemplary “newsvendor” problem for determining the distribution policy for a single
period inventory system 13 for delivering a single newspaper title between three locations, namely, j=1, 2 and 3 (seeFIG. 4 ). For the sake of the example below, demand atLocations Locations
ER(λij ,D j)=D j f(λj ,D j−1)+(D j−λj)F(λj,Dj−2)
EST(λj ,D j)=D j f(λj ,D j)+(λj −D j)(1−F(λj ,D j−1))
where f(•) is the Poisson probability distribution function (pdf) and F(•) is the Poisson cumulative probability distribution function (cdf) for the demand for the consumer item at the jth location, and λj and Dj are respectively the mean demand value and the draw at that location. - The use of the present invention for determining the distribution policy for the single
period inventory system 13 is now described with reference toFIGS. 6-9 in connection with the first simple allocation decision criterion, namely, maximum incremental availability as given by maxj {F(λj,Dj+1)−F(λj,Dj)} subject to one or more of the following constraints: ΣSSj≦Q % ER(λ,D)≦r; % ESO(λ,D)≦e; % EST(λ,D)≦s; aj≦Dj≦bj; and A≦ΣDj≦B. The use of the present invention as exemplified inFIGS. 6-10 can be equally extended to the other simple allocation decision criterion (ii) to (iv) by substitution of their corresponding expressions into the blocks entitled Criterion and Objective in the flow diagrams ofFIGS. 6 and 8 . - To better exemplify the potential of the present invention for more advantageously allocating draw, the following performance metrics % SA, % ESO, % ER, % ES, and % EST are employed for comparing the allocation of the same safety stock quantity in accordance with the conventional approach of the same availability at each location and maximum incremental availability. In accordance with a conventional 80% availability at each location, this imposes a safety stock allocation of 2, 5 and 8 units to
Locations FIG. 7 shows how the same safety stock allocation of Q=15 units using pairwise switching can arrive at a safety stock allocation of 5, 6 and 4 units toLocations Locations - As mentioned earlier, pairwise switching can only be employed in the case of re-allocation of a predetermined draw. The table of
FIG. 9 shows the incremental effect of one-by-one allocation of safety stock units to theLocations Location FIG. 9 enables determining the results of the performance metrics % SA, % ESO, % ER, % ES, and % EST for termination conditions other than a predetermined safety stock quantity, say, % ESO≦15% which in this case imposes a safety stock allocation of 5, 7 and 6 units to theLocations - The use of the present invention for allocating draw to the
Locations FIGS. 10-12 in connection with the first weighted composite allocation decision criterion, namely, w1(% ER(λ,D)−% ER(λ,D0))+w2(% ESO(λ,D0)−% ESO(λ,D)) subject to one or more of the following constraints: ΣSSi≦Q, % ER(λ,D)≦r; % ESO(λ,D)≦e; % EST(λ,D)≦s; ai≦Di≦bi; and A≦ΣDi≦B.FIG. 11 shows the results for repetitions of the method set out in the flow diagram ofFIG. 10 for different expected returns percentage constraints % ER(λ,D)≦r at intervals of about 2% to calculate their corresponding minimal expected sellout percentages % ESO. TheDST 12 graphically shows these results (seeFIG. 12 ) for enabling a user to select a draw vector D, thereby determining the draw allocation between theLocations - While the invention has been described with respect to a limited number of embodiments, it will be appreciated that many variations, modifications, and other applications of the invention can be made within the scope of the appended claims.
Claims (12)
Priority Applications (1)
Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
---|---|---|---|
US11/838,614 US20080027837A1 (en) | 2002-04-08 | 2007-08-14 | Computer Implemented System for Determining a Distribution Policy for a Single Period Inventory System, Optimization Application Therefor, and Method Therefor, and Decision Support Tool for Facilitating User Determination of a Distribution Policy for a Single Period Inventory System |
Applications Claiming Priority (3)
Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
---|---|---|---|
US37014302P | 2002-04-08 | 2002-04-08 | |
US10/407,201 US7664683B2 (en) | 2002-04-08 | 2003-04-07 | Computer implemented system for determining a distribution policy for a single period inventory system, optimization application therefor, and method therefor, and decision support tool for facilitating user determination of a distribution policy for a single period inventory system |
US11/838,614 US20080027837A1 (en) | 2002-04-08 | 2007-08-14 | Computer Implemented System for Determining a Distribution Policy for a Single Period Inventory System, Optimization Application Therefor, and Method Therefor, and Decision Support Tool for Facilitating User Determination of a Distribution Policy for a Single Period Inventory System |
Related Parent Applications (1)
Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
---|---|---|---|
US10/407,201 Division US7664683B2 (en) | 2002-04-08 | 2003-04-07 | Computer implemented system for determining a distribution policy for a single period inventory system, optimization application therefor, and method therefor, and decision support tool for facilitating user determination of a distribution policy for a single period inventory system |
Publications (1)
Publication Number | Publication Date |
---|---|
US20080027837A1 true US20080027837A1 (en) | 2008-01-31 |
Family
ID=29218879
Family Applications (3)
Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
---|---|---|---|
US10/407,201 Active 2027-01-13 US7664683B2 (en) | 2002-04-08 | 2003-04-07 | Computer implemented system for determining a distribution policy for a single period inventory system, optimization application therefor, and method therefor, and decision support tool for facilitating user determination of a distribution policy for a single period inventory system |
US11/838,614 Abandoned US20080027837A1 (en) | 2002-04-08 | 2007-08-14 | Computer Implemented System for Determining a Distribution Policy for a Single Period Inventory System, Optimization Application Therefor, and Method Therefor, and Decision Support Tool for Facilitating User Determination of a Distribution Policy for a Single Period Inventory System |
US12/693,311 Expired - Lifetime US8036958B2 (en) | 2002-04-08 | 2010-01-25 | Computer implemented system for determining a distribution policy for a single period inventory system, optimization application therefor, and method therefor, and decision support tool for facilitating user determination of a distribution policy for a single period inventory system |
Family Applications Before (1)
Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
---|---|---|---|
US10/407,201 Active 2027-01-13 US7664683B2 (en) | 2002-04-08 | 2003-04-07 | Computer implemented system for determining a distribution policy for a single period inventory system, optimization application therefor, and method therefor, and decision support tool for facilitating user determination of a distribution policy for a single period inventory system |
Family Applications After (1)
Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
---|---|---|---|
US12/693,311 Expired - Lifetime US8036958B2 (en) | 2002-04-08 | 2010-01-25 | Computer implemented system for determining a distribution policy for a single period inventory system, optimization application therefor, and method therefor, and decision support tool for facilitating user determination of a distribution policy for a single period inventory system |
Country Status (1)
Country | Link |
---|---|
US (3) | US7664683B2 (en) |
Cited By (3)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US20030200158A1 (en) * | 2002-04-08 | 2003-10-23 | Bart Feldman | Computer implemented system for determining a distribution policy for a single period inventory system, optimization application therefor, and method therefor, and decision support tool for facilitating user determination of a distribution policy for a single period inventory system |
US20040172344A1 (en) * | 2002-11-25 | 2004-09-02 | Zachariah Stockwell | Method and apparatus for automatic replenishment of goods to customer locations |
US20100069416A1 (en) * | 2006-04-03 | 2010-03-18 | Glaxo Group Limited | Azabicyclo [3.1.0] Hexyl Derivatives as Modulators of Dopamine D3 Receptors |
Families Citing this family (13)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US7689477B2 (en) * | 2004-04-16 | 2010-03-30 | Sap Aktiengesellschaft | Apparatus and program product for generating an allocation table in a computerized procurement system |
US7908186B2 (en) * | 2004-04-16 | 2011-03-15 | Sap Aktiengesellschaft | Distribution matrix in an allocation table |
US8046275B2 (en) * | 2004-04-16 | 2011-10-25 | Sap Aktiengesellschaft | Synchronizing an allocation table with a procurement system |
US20060173728A1 (en) * | 2005-01-21 | 2006-08-03 | Lianjun An | Adaptive product configuration model |
US20100241490A1 (en) * | 2009-03-19 | 2010-09-23 | William John Purcell | Evaluating extended supply chains |
US20140058794A1 (en) * | 2012-08-27 | 2014-02-27 | Sap Ag | Method And System For Orders Planning And Optimization With Applications To Food Consumer Products Industry |
US9600793B2 (en) * | 2013-12-09 | 2017-03-21 | International Business Machines Corporation | Active odor cancellation |
US20150199206A1 (en) * | 2014-01-13 | 2015-07-16 | Bigtera Limited | Data distribution device and data distribution method thereof for use in storage system |
US10002364B2 (en) | 2014-06-25 | 2018-06-19 | Oracle International Corporation | Consumption-driven forecasting using multi-level heterogeneous input data |
US10181107B2 (en) | 2014-06-25 | 2019-01-15 | Oracle International Corporation | Using consumption data and an inventory model to generate a replenishment plan |
US10565535B2 (en) | 2014-12-10 | 2020-02-18 | Walmart Apollo, Llc | System having inventory allocation tool and method of using same |
US10438163B2 (en) | 2015-07-02 | 2019-10-08 | Walmart Apollo, Llc | System and method for affinity-based optimal assortment selection for inventory deployment |
US11080726B2 (en) * | 2018-08-30 | 2021-08-03 | Oracle International Corporation | Optimization of demand forecast parameters |
Citations (12)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US4744027A (en) * | 1986-08-22 | 1988-05-10 | American Telephone And Telegraph Company, At&T Bell Laboratories | Method and apparatus for optimizing system operational parameters |
US5596493A (en) * | 1991-04-19 | 1997-01-21 | Meiji Milk Products Co., Ltd. | Method for classifying sale amount characteristics, method for predicting sale volume, method for ordering for restocking, system for classifying sale amount characteristics and system for ordering for restocking |
US5946662A (en) * | 1996-03-29 | 1999-08-31 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method for providing inventory optimization |
US6144945A (en) * | 1997-07-14 | 2000-11-07 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method for fast and accurate evaluation of periodic review inventory policy |
US6341269B1 (en) * | 1999-01-26 | 2002-01-22 | Mercani Technologies, Inc. | System, method and article of manufacture to optimize inventory and merchandising shelf space utilization |
US20030033180A1 (en) * | 2000-10-27 | 2003-02-13 | Manugistics, Inc. | System and method for optimizing resource plans |
US20030200158A1 (en) * | 2002-04-08 | 2003-10-23 | Bart Feldman | Computer implemented system for determining a distribution policy for a single period inventory system, optimization application therefor, and method therefor, and decision support tool for facilitating user determination of a distribution policy for a single period inventory system |
US6826538B1 (en) * | 1999-07-28 | 2004-11-30 | I2 Technologies Us, Inc. | Method for planning key component purchases to optimize revenue |
US6944598B1 (en) * | 1999-09-17 | 2005-09-13 | I2 Technologies Us, Inc. | Binary trees for detecting inventory problems in an enterprise model |
US7092929B1 (en) * | 2000-11-08 | 2006-08-15 | Bluefire Systems, Inc. | Method and apparatus for planning analysis |
US7136830B1 (en) * | 1999-07-20 | 2006-11-14 | World Factory, Inc. | Method of producing, selling, and distributing articles of manufacture through the automated aggregation of orders and the visual representation of standardized shipping volumes |
US7240027B2 (en) * | 2000-04-07 | 2007-07-03 | The Procter & Gamble Company | Method and apparatus for monitoring the flow of items through a store or warehouse |
-
2003
- 2003-04-07 US US10/407,201 patent/US7664683B2/en active Active
-
2007
- 2007-08-14 US US11/838,614 patent/US20080027837A1/en not_active Abandoned
-
2010
- 2010-01-25 US US12/693,311 patent/US8036958B2/en not_active Expired - Lifetime
Patent Citations (12)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US4744027A (en) * | 1986-08-22 | 1988-05-10 | American Telephone And Telegraph Company, At&T Bell Laboratories | Method and apparatus for optimizing system operational parameters |
US5596493A (en) * | 1991-04-19 | 1997-01-21 | Meiji Milk Products Co., Ltd. | Method for classifying sale amount characteristics, method for predicting sale volume, method for ordering for restocking, system for classifying sale amount characteristics and system for ordering for restocking |
US5946662A (en) * | 1996-03-29 | 1999-08-31 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method for providing inventory optimization |
US6144945A (en) * | 1997-07-14 | 2000-11-07 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method for fast and accurate evaluation of periodic review inventory policy |
US6341269B1 (en) * | 1999-01-26 | 2002-01-22 | Mercani Technologies, Inc. | System, method and article of manufacture to optimize inventory and merchandising shelf space utilization |
US7136830B1 (en) * | 1999-07-20 | 2006-11-14 | World Factory, Inc. | Method of producing, selling, and distributing articles of manufacture through the automated aggregation of orders and the visual representation of standardized shipping volumes |
US6826538B1 (en) * | 1999-07-28 | 2004-11-30 | I2 Technologies Us, Inc. | Method for planning key component purchases to optimize revenue |
US6944598B1 (en) * | 1999-09-17 | 2005-09-13 | I2 Technologies Us, Inc. | Binary trees for detecting inventory problems in an enterprise model |
US7240027B2 (en) * | 2000-04-07 | 2007-07-03 | The Procter & Gamble Company | Method and apparatus for monitoring the flow of items through a store or warehouse |
US20030033180A1 (en) * | 2000-10-27 | 2003-02-13 | Manugistics, Inc. | System and method for optimizing resource plans |
US7092929B1 (en) * | 2000-11-08 | 2006-08-15 | Bluefire Systems, Inc. | Method and apparatus for planning analysis |
US20030200158A1 (en) * | 2002-04-08 | 2003-10-23 | Bart Feldman | Computer implemented system for determining a distribution policy for a single period inventory system, optimization application therefor, and method therefor, and decision support tool for facilitating user determination of a distribution policy for a single period inventory system |
Cited By (4)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US20030200158A1 (en) * | 2002-04-08 | 2003-10-23 | Bart Feldman | Computer implemented system for determining a distribution policy for a single period inventory system, optimization application therefor, and method therefor, and decision support tool for facilitating user determination of a distribution policy for a single period inventory system |
US7664683B2 (en) | 2002-04-08 | 2010-02-16 | Oracle International Corporation | Computer implemented system for determining a distribution policy for a single period inventory system, optimization application therefor, and method therefor, and decision support tool for facilitating user determination of a distribution policy for a single period inventory system |
US20040172344A1 (en) * | 2002-11-25 | 2004-09-02 | Zachariah Stockwell | Method and apparatus for automatic replenishment of goods to customer locations |
US20100069416A1 (en) * | 2006-04-03 | 2010-03-18 | Glaxo Group Limited | Azabicyclo [3.1.0] Hexyl Derivatives as Modulators of Dopamine D3 Receptors |
Also Published As
Publication number | Publication date |
---|---|
US20030200158A1 (en) | 2003-10-23 |
US8036958B2 (en) | 2011-10-11 |
US7664683B2 (en) | 2010-02-16 |
US20100169167A1 (en) | 2010-07-01 |
Similar Documents
Publication | Publication Date | Title |
---|---|---|
US8036958B2 (en) | Computer implemented system for determining a distribution policy for a single period inventory system, optimization application therefor, and method therefor, and decision support tool for facilitating user determination of a distribution policy for a single period inventory system | |
US7313532B2 (en) | Computer implemented system and method for determining the most profitable distribution policy | |
US7406435B2 (en) | Computer implemented method and system for computing and evaluating demand information | |
US20030187767A1 (en) | Optimal allocation of budget among marketing programs | |
US7881959B2 (en) | On demand selection of marketing offers in response to inbound communications | |
US5761389A (en) | Data analyzing method and system | |
US7653561B2 (en) | Stochastic multiple choice knapsack assortment optimizer | |
US8165904B2 (en) | Allocating inventory levels | |
US20140058781A1 (en) | Assortment planning and optimization | |
US7236949B2 (en) | Computer implemented system for estimating the demand dependent unit stockout cost of a consumer item at a location of a single peroid inventory system, stockout cost application therefor, and method therefor | |
EP0725339A2 (en) | Apparatus and method for managing a distributed data processing system workload according to a plurality of distinct processing goal types | |
US20060106658A1 (en) | Activity Based Cost Modeling | |
US7693740B2 (en) | Dynamic selection of complementary inbound marketing offers | |
JP4678879B2 (en) | Sales prediction system, method and computer program | |
US20070179791A1 (en) | System and method for configuring scoring rules and generating supplier performance ratings | |
AU2002229085A1 (en) | Stochastic multiple choice knapsack assortment optimizer | |
US7689453B2 (en) | Capturing marketing events and data models | |
US20060253469A1 (en) | Dynamic selection of outbound marketing events | |
US20060253315A1 (en) | Dynamic selection of groups of outbound marketing events | |
Kim et al. | The cost impact of using simple forecasting techniques in a supply chain | |
Urban | Supply contracts with periodic, stationary commitment | |
US20080300981A1 (en) | Campaign optimization | |
US20100121678A1 (en) | Calculating production capacity, capacity utilization, demand allocation, and average inventory levels | |
CN113935528A (en) | Intelligent scheduling method and device, computer equipment and storage medium | |
CN111260288B (en) | Order management method, device, medium and electronic equipment |
Legal Events
Date | Code | Title | Description |
---|---|---|---|
STCB | Information on status: application discontinuation |
Free format text: ABANDONED -- FAILURE TO RESPOND TO AN OFFICE ACTION |
|
AS | Assignment |
Owner name: DEMANTRA LTD., ISRAEL Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNORS:FELDMAN, BART C.;ARONOWICH, MICHAEL;NATAN, OFRA;AND OTHERS;SIGNING DATES FROM 20060425 TO 20060426;REEL/FRAME:044387/0112 |
|
AS | Assignment |
Owner name: ORACLE DEMANTRA R & D CENTER ISRAEL LTD, ISRAEL Free format text: CHANGE OF NAME;ASSIGNOR:DEMANTRA LTD.;REEL/FRAME:045356/0182 Effective date: 20060718 |
|
AS | Assignment |
Owner name: ORACLE TECHNOLOGY COMPANY, CALIFORNIA Free format text: IP TRANSFER AGREEMENT;ASSIGNOR:ORACLE DEMANTRA R & D CENTER ISRAEL LTD.;REEL/FRAME:046185/0001 Effective date: 20120531 |