{"title":"库存控制系统中的服务水平","authors":"Helmut Schneider","doi":"10.1016/0377-841X(79)90046-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This paper deals with two familiar ordering policies with are usually refered to as (Q,s) policy and (s,S) policy. It is demonstrated that the (Q,s) policy which is implemented in IMPACT, does not work satisfactorily in a periodic review system since the obtained service will be very different from the desired service. In contrast to the (Q,s) policy the (s,S) policy nearly yields the desired service-level.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100475,"journal":{"name":"Engineering and Process Economics","volume":"4 2","pages":"Pages 341-348"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1979-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/0377-841X(79)90046-9","citationCount":"17","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The service level in inventory control systems\",\"authors\":\"Helmut Schneider\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/0377-841X(79)90046-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>This paper deals with two familiar ordering policies with are usually refered to as (Q,s) policy and (s,S) policy. It is demonstrated that the (Q,s) policy which is implemented in IMPACT, does not work satisfactorily in a periodic review system since the obtained service will be very different from the desired service. In contrast to the (Q,s) policy the (s,S) policy nearly yields the desired service-level.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":100475,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Engineering and Process Economics\",\"volume\":\"4 2\",\"pages\":\"Pages 341-348\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1979-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/0377-841X(79)90046-9\",\"citationCount\":\"17\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Engineering and Process Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0377841X79900469\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Engineering and Process Economics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0377841X79900469","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper deals with two familiar ordering policies with are usually refered to as (Q,s) policy and (s,S) policy. It is demonstrated that the (Q,s) policy which is implemented in IMPACT, does not work satisfactorily in a periodic review system since the obtained service will be very different from the desired service. In contrast to the (Q,s) policy the (s,S) policy nearly yields the desired service-level.