# American Institute of Mathematical Sciences

• Previous Article
An integrated bi-objective optimization model and improved genetic algorithm for vehicle routing problems with temporal and spatial constraints
• JIMO Home
• This Issue
• Next Article
A smoothing SAA algorithm for a portfolio choice model based on second-order stochastic dominance measures
May  2020, 16(3): 1187-1202. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2018199

## Optimal ordering policy for inventory mechanism with a stochastic short-term price discount

 1 School of Management Science, Qufu Normal University, Rizhao Shandong, 276800, China 2 School of Management and Economics, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing, 100081, China

Received  April 2017 Revised  November 2017 Published  December 2018

Fund Project: This work is supported by the Natural Science Foundation of China (11671228, 71471101) and Shandong Provincial Natural Science Foundation (ZR2015GZ008)

This paper considers an inventory mechanism in which the supplier may provide a short-term price discount to the retailer at a future time with some uncertainty. To maximize the retailer's profit in this setting, we establish an optimal replenishment and stocking strategy model. Based on the retailer's inventory cost-benefit analysis, we present a closed-form solution for the inventory model and provide an optimal ordering policy to the retailer. Numerical experiments and numerical sensitivity are given to provide some high insights to the inventory model.

Citation: Yiju Wang, Wei Xing, Hengxia Gao. Optimal ordering policy for inventory mechanism with a stochastic short-term price discount. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2020, 16 (3) : 1187-1202. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2018199
##### References:

show all references

##### References:
Optimal order policy for Scenario 1
Policy 1 for Scenario 2
Policy 2 for Scenario 2
Policy 3 for Scenario 2
The expected increased profit as a function of parameter $p$
The expected increased profit as a function of parameter $\gamma$
Notation
 Symbol Description Symbol Description $\lambda$ retailer's market demand rate $t_s$ the start time of possible discount $K$ fixed ordering cost $t_e$ the end time of possible discount $c$ retailer's unit purchase price $t_r$ the special ordering time $b$ retailer's unit selling price $q_s~$ remaining inventory at $t_s$ $h$ retailer's inventory holding cost $q_e$ remaining inventory at $t_e$ per unit item per unit time $q_r$ remaining inventory at $t_r$ $p$ probability that the price $Q_0$ order size before $t_s$ discount takes place $Q_d$ special order size $\gamma$ discount rate $*$ indicates the optimal value
 Symbol Description Symbol Description $\lambda$ retailer's market demand rate $t_s$ the start time of possible discount $K$ fixed ordering cost $t_e$ the end time of possible discount $c$ retailer's unit purchase price $t_r$ the special ordering time $b$ retailer's unit selling price $q_s~$ remaining inventory at $t_s$ $h$ retailer's inventory holding cost $q_e$ remaining inventory at $t_e$ per unit item per unit time $q_r$ remaining inventory at $t_r$ $p$ probability that the price $Q_0$ order size before $t_s$ discount takes place $Q_d$ special order size $\gamma$ discount rate $*$ indicates the optimal value
Numerical result for Example 5.1
 Policy $Q_0$ $q_r$ $Q_d$ $E$ $\pi_{ \rm EOQ}$ 130 40 132.22 -3.50 $\pi_s$ 150 0 172.22 21.38 $\pi_e$ 116.67 0 172.22 24.05
 Policy $Q_0$ $q_r$ $Q_d$ $E$ $\pi_{ \rm EOQ}$ 130 40 132.22 -3.50 $\pi_s$ 150 0 172.22 21.38 $\pi_e$ 116.67 0 172.22 24.05
Numerical result for Example 5.2
 Policy $Q_0$ $q_r$ $Q_d$ $E$ $\pi_s$ 150 0 172.22 0.25 $\bar\pi$ 117.86 3.58 168.64 2.54
 Policy $Q_0$ $q_r$ $Q_d$ $E$ $\pi_s$ 150 0 172.22 0.25 $\bar\pi$ 117.86 3.58 168.64 2.54
Impact of parameter $p$ on the retailer's profit
 $p$ $\pi_{ \rm EOQ}$ $\pi_s$ $\pi_e$ $\bar{\pi}$ EOQ ordering policy 0.01 -0.11 -7.02 -4.35 -0.07 0 EOQ 0.05 -0.58 -3.10 -0.43 0.64 0 $\bar{\pi}$ 0.10 -1.16 1.79 4.46 / 0 $\pi_e$ 0.15 -1.74 6.69 9.36 / 0 $\pi_e$ 0.30 -3.50 21.38 24.05 / 0 $\pi_e$ 0.50 -5.83 40.97 43.64 / 0 $\pi_e$ 0.80 -9.32 70.36 73.02 / 0 $\pi_e$ 0.90 -10.49 80.15 82.82 / 0 $\pi_e$ 0.95 -11.07 85.05 87.71 / 0 $\pi_e$
 $p$ $\pi_{ \rm EOQ}$ $\pi_s$ $\pi_e$ $\bar{\pi}$ EOQ ordering policy 0.01 -0.11 -7.02 -4.35 -0.07 0 EOQ 0.05 -0.58 -3.10 -0.43 0.64 0 $\bar{\pi}$ 0.10 -1.16 1.79 4.46 / 0 $\pi_e$ 0.15 -1.74 6.69 9.36 / 0 $\pi_e$ 0.30 -3.50 21.38 24.05 / 0 $\pi_e$ 0.50 -5.83 40.97 43.64 / 0 $\pi_e$ 0.80 -9.32 70.36 73.02 / 0 $\pi_e$ 0.90 -10.49 80.15 82.82 / 0 $\pi_e$ 0.95 -11.07 85.05 87.71 / 0 $\pi_e$
Numerical results for Example 5.3
 Policy $Q_0$ $q_r$ $Q_d$ $E$ $\pi_{ \rm EOQ}$ 130 40 97.76 -22.60 $\pi_s$ 150 0 137.76 -2.91 $\pi_e$ 116.67 0 137.76 -0.24
 Policy $Q_0$ $q_r$ $Q_d$ $E$ $\pi_{ \rm EOQ}$ 130 40 97.76 -22.60 $\pi_s$ 150 0 137.76 -2.91 $\pi_e$ 116.67 0 137.76 -0.24
Impact of parameter $\gamma$ on retailer's ordering policy
 $\gamma$ $\pi_{ \rm EOQ}$ $\pi_s$ $\pi_e$ $\bar{\pi}$ EOQ optimal policy 0.5 280.65 331.45 334.11 / 0 $\pi_e$ 0.6 161.48 205.80 208.47 / 0 $\pi_e$ 0.7 83.57 121.41 124.07 / 0 $\pi_e$ 0.8 31.44 62.80 65.47 / 0 $\pi_e$ 0.9 -3.50 21.38 24.05 / 0 $\pi_e$ 0.95 -16.21 5.43 8.09 / 0 $\pi_e$ 0.98 -22.61 -2.91 -0.24 / 0 EOQ 0.99 -24.55 -5.50 -2.83 / 0 EOQ
 $\gamma$ $\pi_{ \rm EOQ}$ $\pi_s$ $\pi_e$ $\bar{\pi}$ EOQ optimal policy 0.5 280.65 331.45 334.11 / 0 $\pi_e$ 0.6 161.48 205.80 208.47 / 0 $\pi_e$ 0.7 83.57 121.41 124.07 / 0 $\pi_e$ 0.8 31.44 62.80 65.47 / 0 $\pi_e$ 0.9 -3.50 21.38 24.05 / 0 $\pi_e$ 0.95 -16.21 5.43 8.09 / 0 $\pi_e$ 0.98 -22.61 -2.91 -0.24 / 0 EOQ 0.99 -24.55 -5.50 -2.83 / 0 EOQ
 [1] Massimo Barnabei, Alessandro Borri, Andrea De Gaetano, Costanzo Manes, Pasquale Palumbo, Jorge Guerra Pires. A short-term food intake model involving glucose, insulin and ghrelin. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2021  doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2021114 [2] Gaurav Nagpal, Udayan Chanda, Nitant Upasani. Inventory replenishment policies for two successive generations price-sensitive technology products. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2021  doi: 10.3934/jimo.2021036 [3] Maha Daoud, El Haj Laamri. Fractional Laplacians : A short survey. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - S, 2021  doi: 10.3934/dcdss.2021027 [4] Guiyang Zhu. Optimal pricing and ordering policy for defective items under temporary price reduction with inspection errors and price sensitive demand. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2021  doi: 10.3934/jimo.2021060 [5] Haripriya Barman, Magfura Pervin, Sankar Kumar Roy, Gerhard-Wilhelm Weber. Back-ordered inventory model with inflation in a cloudy-fuzzy environment. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2021, 17 (4) : 1913-1941. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2020052 [6] Chong Wang, Xu Chen. Fresh produce price-setting newsvendor with bidirectional option contracts. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2021  doi: 10.3934/jimo.2021052 [7] Mirelson M. Freitas, Anderson J. A. Ramos, Manoel J. Dos Santos, Jamille L.L. Almeida. Dynamics of piezoelectric beams with magnetic effects and delay term. Evolution Equations & Control Theory, 2021  doi: 10.3934/eect.2021015 [8] Xiaoyi Zhou, Tong Ye, Tony T. Lee. Designing and analysis of a Wi-Fi data offloading strategy catering for the preference of mobile users. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2021  doi: 10.3934/jimo.2021038 [9] Kai Kang, Taotao Lu, Jing Zhang. Financing strategy selection and coordination considering risk aversion in a capital-constrained supply chain. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2021  doi: 10.3934/jimo.2021042 [10] Wei Wang, Yang Shen, Linyi Qian, Zhixin Yang. Hedging strategy for unit-linked life insurance contracts with self-exciting jump clustering. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2021  doi: 10.3934/jimo.2021072 [11] Shoufeng Ji, Jinhuan Tang, Minghe Sun, Rongjuan Luo. Multi-objective optimization for a combined location-routing-inventory system considering carbon-capped differences. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2021  doi: 10.3934/jimo.2021051 [12] Xue Qiao, Zheng Wang, Haoxun Chen. Joint optimal pricing and inventory management policy and its sensitivity analysis for perishable products: Lost sale case. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2021  doi: 10.3934/jimo.2021079 [13] Manoel J. Dos Santos, Baowei Feng, Dilberto S. Almeida Júnior, Mauro L. Santos. Global and exponential attractors for a nonlinear porous elastic system with delay term. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2021, 26 (5) : 2805-2828. doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2020206 [14] Anastasiia Panchuk, Frank Westerhoff. Speculative behavior and chaotic asset price dynamics: On the emergence of a bandcount accretion bifurcation structure. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2021  doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2021117 [15] Qiang Lin, Yang Xiao, Jingju Zheng. Selecting the supply chain financing mode under price-sensitive demand: Confirmed warehouse financing vs. trade credit. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2021, 17 (4) : 2031-2049. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2020057 [16] Chih-Chiang Fang. Bayesian decision making in determining optimal leased term and preventive maintenance scheme for leased facilities. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2020  doi: 10.3934/jimo.2020127 [17] Xiaoming Wang. Quasi-periodic solutions for a class of second order differential equations with a nonlinear damping term. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - S, 2017, 10 (3) : 543-556. doi: 10.3934/dcdss.2017027 [18] Bouthaina Abdelhedi, Hatem Zaag. Single point blow-up and final profile for a perturbed nonlinear heat equation with a gradient and a non-local term. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - S, 2021  doi: 10.3934/dcdss.2021032 [19] Patrick Beißner, Emanuela Rosazza Gianin. The term structure of sharpe ratios and arbitrage-free asset pricing in continuous time. Probability, Uncertainty and Quantitative Risk, 2021, 6 (1) : 23-52. doi: 10.3934/puqr.2021002 [20] Shiwen Niu, Hongmei Cheng, Rong Yuan. A free boundary problem of some modified Leslie-Gower predator-prey model with nonlocal diffusion term. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2021  doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2021129

2019 Impact Factor: 1.366