Model save

README.md

@@ -12,202 +12,208 @@ tags:
 - loss:MultipleNegativesRankingLoss
 base_model: BAAI/bge-small-en-v1.5
 widget:
-- source_sentence: "search_document: Innovation by P/OM for New Product Development \
-    \ ◾  417\nPillar 2 of sustainability refers to economic forces. It is a contention\
-    \ of almost \nall economists that real business cycles in economic systems are\
-    \ normal and outside \nthe control of governmental intervention. However, even\
-    \ the most passive interven-\ntionists believe that some steps can be taken to\
-    \ alleviate the pain of severe reces -\nsions. Proactive governors take steps\
-    \ to shield their economies from economic down \nturns. Shielding (protecting)\
-    \ from long-lasting damage is a strong form of sustain -\nability. The jury has\
-    \ not yet passed judgment on what can and cannot be done to \nTop ex\necutive\
-    \ turnover\nProduct life is finite\nThere are taxes\nWages must \nbe paid\nPlan\
-    \ for th\ne\ninevitable\nPlan for the \nfuture\nPlan to a\nvoid pa\nrts of the\
-    \ \nfutureMake the \nfuture\nTap potenti\nalities\nPlan to change the course of\n\
-    the future (re\nquires R and D)\nStatus quo objective\ns\nEvolutionary objectivesRevolutionar\n\
-    y obj\nective\ns\n“D\neg\nree of change” in obj\nec\ntive\ns\n(changes one’\n\
-    s vi\new of the \nfuture\n)\nranging from in\nevitables to improbable\ns\n(requires\
-    \ an early warning system)\nPrepare for \neventualitie\ns\nEtc.Probable\nPo\n\
-    ssibleIm\npo\nssible\nImprobable b\nb\nc\na\nc\nde\na\n1\n2\nStart here\nFigure\
-    \ 11.1 Planning tree of management options."
+- source_sentence: "search_document: 60  ◾  Production and Operations Management Systems\n\
+    can compromise quality. Operations management should try to avoid supporting \n\
+    productivity increases gained in this way; the improvement is temporary, at best.\
+    \ \nOther ways of obtaining lower costs such as the use of cheaper components\
+    \ and raw \nmaterials may lower quality.\nThe CEO had something else in mind.\
+    \ When requesting increased productiv -\nity, the CEO meant using technology and\
+    \ good P/OM methods to improve the \nprocess without lowering quality. The CEO’s\
+    \ call for increased productivity is in \nresponse to competitive strategies.\n\
+    Decreasing quality to match lower prices is not a way to keep customers. \nImproved\
+    \ productivity, if it is to translate into greater customer satisfaction and \n\
+    loyalty, must come from working smarter, not harder. This means improving pro\
+    \ -\nductivity by means other than asking people to work faster, which usually\
+    \ degrades \nquality.\nThis highlights the strong functional interaction between\
+    \ marketing and P/OM \n(which is emphasized in Chapter 11). The managers of these\
+    \ areas are associates \nworking together to manage the effects of price–demand\
+    \ elasticity on production \ncosts and on meeting quality standards. Price–demand\
+    \ elasticity is another example \nof a crucial relationship between systems partners\
+    \ (marketing and P/OM) required \nfor successful strategic planning.\nElasticity\
+    \ is a rate-of-change measure that expresses the degree to which demand \ngrows\
+    \ or shrinks in response to a price change. A product with high elasticity expe-\n\
+    riences large decreases (increases) in demand as price increases (decreases),\
+    \ whereas \na product with low elasticity experiences small decreases (increases)\
+    \ in demand with \nthe same degree of price increases (decreases). Low elasticity,\
+    \ called inelasticity, \nmeans that demand levels are relatively insensitive to\
+    \ price changes. Marketing \nmanagers frequently ask market researchers to study\
+    \ the price elasticity of products \nor services to determine how fast demand\
+    \ falls off as price is increased. Products \nthat have no substitutable alternatives\
+    \ (as perceived by customers) usually have low \nelasticity. Product designers\
+    \ who strive for exceptional qualities and production \nmanagers who demand the\
+    \ highest feasible process qualities are creating barriers to \nsubstitutability\
+    \ (inelastic products).\nPerfect inelasticity—when demand does not change, no\
+    \ matter what the \nprice—is an accurate description of the situation when an\
+    \ industrial customer is \ndependent on one supplier for special materials. Most\
+    \ customers try to get out of \nsuch a constraining situation for obvious reasons.\n\
+    Elasticity is a complex relationship. The rate of change between price and demand\
+    \ \nis not always smooth and regular. There can be kinks in the line or curve.\
+    \ These \noccur, for example, when an increase in price causes demand to increase,\
+    \ which \nmight happen when price becomes high enough to have “snob appeal,” which\
+    \ opens \na new market. Despite difficulties, it is important to measure elasticity,\
+    \ thereby \nrelating price and volume—which are critical factors for production\
+    \ planning.\nThe elasticity–productivity tie between operations management and\
+    \ marketing \nis attributed to the following:"
   sentences:
-  - 'search_query: Project Management'
-  - 'search_query: Innovation by P/OM for New Product Development'
-  - 'search_query: What is the FCFS rule and how is it applied in the given context?'
-- source_sentence: "search_document: Long­Term Planning (Facilities, Location, and Layout) \
-    \ ◾  381\nService industries are often associated with particular kinds and shapes\
-    \ of \nstructures. Airports, hospitals, theaters, and educational institutions\
-    \ typify the site-\nstructure demands for service specifics. Technological information\
-    \ and knowledge \nof real-process details are required to reach good decisions.\n\
-    Companies that build their own facilities to match work configuration require-\n\
-    ments make fewer concessions. Continuous-process industries—like petro -\nchemicals—have\
-    \ to build to process specifications. Even for the job shop, special \nrequirements\
-    \ for space and strong floor supports—say for a large mixing vat—can \ninfluence\
-    \ the choice of structure. When renting, building, or buying, expert help \nfrom\
-    \ real-estate specialists, architects, and building engineers should be obtained\
-    \ to \nensure proper evaluation of an existing facility or to plan a new structure.\
-    \ Among \nthe facility elements to be considered are\n ◾ Is there enough floor\
-    \ space?\n ◾ Are the aisles wide enough?\n ◾ How many stories are desirable?\n\
-    \ ◾ Is the ceiling high enough?\n ◾ Are skylights in the roof useful?\n ◾ Roof\
-    \ shapes permit a degree of control over illumination, temperature, and \nventilation.\
-    \ What are the maintenance requirements for roofs?\nFor new construction, in addition\
-    \ to costs, speed counts. Building codes \nmay be too restrictive. Industrial\
-    \ parks may be appealing. Special-purpose facili -\nties usually have lower resale\
-    \ value than general-purpose facilities. Good resale \nvalue can be critical,\
-    \ allowing a company flexibility to relocate when conditions \nchange.\nCompany\
-    \ services should be listed. Capacities of parking lots, cafeterias, \nmedical\
-    \ emergency facilities, male and female restrooms—in the right propor -\ntions—must\
-    \ be supplied. Adequate fire and police protection must be defined. \nRail sidings,\
-    \ road access, and ship-docking facilities should be specified in the \ndetailed\
-    \ facility-factor analysis. Access to the Internet and various telecom ser -\n\
-    vices is no longer considered an extra advantage; it is a necessity in almost\
-    \ all \ncases.\nExternal appearance and internal appearance are factors. An increasing\
-    \ num -\nber of companies are using the factory as a showroom. Some service industries\
-    \ \nuse elegant offices to impress their clients. Others use simplicity to emphasize\
-    \ \nfrugality and utilitarian policies. Some consider appearance to be a frill.\
-    \ Others \ntake appearance seriously and illuminate their building at night. Japanese\
-    \ man -\nagement stresses cleanliness as a requirement for maintaining employees’\
-    \ pride in \ntheir company. When Sanyo acquired dilapidated facilities, they painted\
-    \ the walls \nand polished the floors. Morale was lifted. Production’s output\
-    \ quality improved. \nCosts decreased."
-  sentences:
-  - 'search_query: What are the key responsibilities of a Corporate Vice President
-    of Manufacturing in the context of Production and Operations Management?'
-  - 'search_query: In the context of long-term planning for facilities, location,
-    and layout, which of the following is NOT typically a consideration for service
-    industries when determining the structure demands?'
-  - 'search_query: What are the key differences between PERT and CPM in terms of activity
-    time specification, and how did their origins influence these differences?'
-- source_sentence: "search_document: 352  ◾  Production and Operations Management\
-    \ Systems\n9.9  e-Business\nDevelopments in Internet-enabled technologies are\
-    \ changing the business func -\ntions, the business processes, and the structures\
-    \ of business organizations. See \nGupta et al. (2009) for a detailed discussion\
-    \ of e-business developments that are \npresented in this section. The text in\
-    \ this section has been reproduced with the \npermission of the authors.\nToday,\
-    \ web-based functions span across product design, e-auction and procure-\nment,\
-    \ vendor development, customer relations management, logistics and distribu-\n\
-    tion, and pricing. The enabling web-based technology integrates various business\
-    \ \nfunctions and improves communication among business partners in a supply chain.\
-    \ \nOverall, the Internet has posed many challenges and has provided many opportu\
-    \ -\nnities to supply chain managers.\ne-Business is a multidimensional discipline\
-    \ involving the application of technol-\nogy, the study of customers’ attitudes,\
-    \ expectations, and satisfaction, the identification \nof internal organizational\
-    \ environment, the study of the relationships among part -\nners in the supply\
-    \ chain, the development of collaborative strategies and coordination \nmechanisms,\
-    \ and the development of analytical models for operating (e.g., inventory \nand\
-    \ pricing) decisions. The e-business area has been influenced by the developments\
-    \ \nin many academic fields that include but are not limited to the following:\
-    \ behavioral \nsciences, computer science, economics, information systems, marketing,\
-    \ operations \nmanagement, operations research/management science, and technology\
-    \ management.\nWe discuss the developments in this nascent yet expanding field\
-    \ in the follow -\ning three subsections: e-business system design and competition,\
-    \ conflict, collabo -\nration and coordination (C4), and radio frequency identification\
-    \ (RFID).\n9.9.1  e-Business System Design\nThe design of e-business systems has\
-    \ become an important and major organiza -\ntional endeavor. P/OM can make significant\
-    \ contributions to the profitability of the \nInternet-based businesses (Starr,\
-    \ 2003). Designing a user-friendly web interface has \nbecome crucial in order\
-    \ to improve customer satisfaction and ensure the ultimate \nsuccess of e-business\
-    \ activities. The research on e-business system design shows that \nsystem flexibility,\
-    \ quality of service, product attributes, and perceived ease of using \nthe e-business\
-    \ systems are important factors that influence customer satisfaction \nand loyalty.\
-    \ The design of e-business system should also take into account the cus -\ntomer\
-    \ characteristics in the case of heterogeneous customers. It was also observed\
-    \ \nby the researchers that e-process adoption is easier if the internal organizational\
-    \ \nenvironment supports the e-process and the e-process leads to improved organiza\
-    \ -\ntional performance. Some of the relevant research studies include: Ba and\
-    \ Johnson \n(2008), Boyer and Olson (2002), Field et al. (2004), Heim and Sinha\
-    \ (2002), \nRabinovich et al. (2008), Tatsiopoulos et al. (2002), and Tsikriktsis\
-    \ et al. (2004)."
-  sentences:
-  - 'search_query: ◾  Production and Operations Management Systems'
+  - 'search_query: Introduction to Production and Operations Management   ◾  41'
   - 'search_query: In the context of Production and Operations Management Systems,
-    what is the primary purpose of inventory management, and what are the potential
-    risks associated with maintaining large inventories?'
-  - 'search_query: In the context of e-business developments, which of the following
-    is NOT mentioned as a web-based function that spans across various business functions?'
-- source_sentence: "search_document: 68  ◾  Production and Operations Management Systems\n\
-    to specialize in highvolume, serialized flow shops, which extended the concept\
-    \ \nand application of assembly synchronization to manufacturing and assembly\
-    \ \nsystems.\n2.5.5 Statistical Quality Control—P/OM’s Fourth Step\nInterchangeable\
-    \ parts required manufacturing methods that made batches of \nparts conforming\
-    \ to tolerance limits. Shewhart developed the theory of SQC that \nenabled manufacturing\
-    \ to design and control processes that could achieve these \nobjectives. SQC is\
-    \ discussed in detail in Chapter 8. SQC was focused on the pro -\nducer’s ability\
-    \ to control the variability of the process that was making the parts \nthat had\
-    \ to fit within the specified tolerance limits. For the first time, the output\
-    \ \nof the transformation process could be stabilized and controlled. This was\
-    \ a major \ncontribution to production theory.\nWalter Shewhart’s major work,\
-    \ which was published in 1930, described his con-\ncepts about why SQC works and\
-    \ how to apply it (see Shewhart 1939; Juran and \nGryna 1980; Deming 1986) also\
-    \ participated in the development of SQC theory \nand later on played a crucial\
-    \ role in its implementation and dissemination.\nThe United States was the first\
-    \ country that consistently used SQC, which it did \nthrough the 1940’s and the\
-    \ early 1950’s, but by 1960 the majority of SQC users were \nin Japan. US organizations\
-    \ reported that they had dropped SQC to make cost reduc-\ntions. Quality was considered\
-    \ good enough to replace costly staff departments with \ninspectors at the end\
-    \ of the production line. By the 1980’s, however, under great com-\npetitive pressure\
-    \ from quality-driven Japanese organizations, many US companies \nrestored SQC\
-    \ and enhanced it with broader concepts into TQM activities.\nOrganizations like\
-    \ Motorola, Toyota, and GE are considered to be pioneers \nleading the development\
-    \ of TQM and Six Sigma within the framework of the \nsystems approach. The TQM\
-    \ approach applied to the production transformation \nsystem integrates the goals\
-    \ of productivity and quality. It represents a major step \nforward in the theory\
-    \ of production and an organizational feat to have gained broad \nacceptance at\
-    \ all levels. Six-SigmaSM, a registered service mark of Motorola—which \ndeveloped\
-    \ it—is a culmination of TQM. Motorola reported more than US $17 \nbillion in\
-    \ savings from Six Sigma in the early days of application (see Six Sigma—\nWikipedia).\
-    \ Many companies are now using Six Sigma, and certification programs \nare offered\
-    \ by dozens of schools.\n2.5.6 Lean Production Systems—P/OM’s Fifth Step\nDuring\
-    \ the 1970’s–1990’s, Japanese organizations spearheaded by Toyota devel -\noped\
-    \ a new kind of production methodology called lean production systems (LPS; \n\
-    also called the Toyota Production System). These systems combine a deep under\
-    \ -\nstanding of quality with a desire to be fast (if not the fastest) and a fanatical\
-    \ distaste \nfor all kinds of waste. LPS methodology is now a worldwide endeavor."
+    what is the primary concern when productivity increases are achieved through compromising
+    quality?'
+  - 'search_query: ---------------------'
+- source_sentence: "search_document: Supply Chain Management  ◾  361\nchain participants.\
+    \ These oscillations are known as bullwhip effect and described in \nthe sections\
+    \ on bullwhip effect later in the chapter.\nFigures 9.10 and 9.11 show the SOH\
+    \ and orders placed by the retailer and dis-\ntributor, respectively. It is evident\
+    \ that large oscillations are costing all participants \na great deal. This is\
+    \ in spite of the fact that a review of the orders made by both the \nretailer\
+    \ and the distributor leads to the conclusion that the ordering policies fol -\n\
+    lowed were sensible.\nFigure 9.12 compares the end SOH results for the retailer\
+    \ and the distributor. \nThe effect had seemed enormous to the retailer. However,\
+    \ when the comparison is \nmade with the distributor, the retailer’s swings were\
+    \ gentle. The effect is going to be \neven worse at the producer’s level.\nIf\
+    \ the increased demand seems to be sustained over a reasonable period of time,\
+    \ \nthe producer might invest in more capacity (equipment and people) for what\
+    \ seems \nWeek Begin SOHS upply Net SOH End SOHO rder quantity Delivery weekDemand\n\
+    1\n2\n3\n4\n5\n6\n7\n8\n9\n10\n11\n12\n13\n14\n15\n16\n17\n18\n19\n20\n16\n32\n\
+    64\n64\n48\n32\n16\n16\n0\n0\n0\n0\n0\n16\n32\n48\n80\n128\n80\n16\n6\n7\n8\n\
+    9\n10\n11\n12\n13\n14\n15\n16\n17\n18\n19\n20\n21\n18*\n23\n24\n25\n*FedEx delivery\n\
+    *Note that the order for 80 cases made in week 17 is expedited via FedEx at extra\
+    \ cost to\nbe delivered at the beginning of week 18.\n64\n64\n48\n32\n16\n4\n\
+    –4\n8\n56\n104\n136\n152\n152\n152\n128\n96\n64\n0\n–16\n–64\n16\n16\n16\n16\n\
+    16\n16\n32\n64\n64\n48\n32\n16\n16\n0\n0\n0\n0\n80\n16\n32\n80\n80\n64\n48\n32\n\
+    20\n28\n72\n120\n152\n168\n168\n168\n152\n128\n96\n64\n80\n0\n–32\n64\n48\n32\n\
+    16\n4\n–4\n8\n56\n104\n136\n152\n152\n152\n128\n96\n64\n0\n–16\n–64\n–64\n–16\n\
+    –32\n–32\n–32\n–28\n–24\n–20\n–16\n–16\n–16\n–16\n–16\n–16\n–24\n–32\n–32\n–64\n\
+    –94\n–64\n–32\nFigure 9.9 Supply chain simulation of distributors ordering from\
+    \ producers \n(manufacturers)."
   sentences:
-  - 'search_query: In the context of the document, what is the primary role of P/OM
-    (Process and Operations Management) in a globally connected world?'
-  - 'search_query: In the context of Capacity Management and Aggregate Production
-    Planning, what is the significance of idle time accumulation, and how does it
-    affect the production planning for the month of February?'
+  - 'search_query: In the context of job evaluation, which of the following methods
+    is NOT typically used by HR professionals?'
+  - 'search_query: Supply Chain Management  ◾  361'
+  - 'search_query: In the context of Function 5, which is related to Production and
+    Operations Management Systems, what are the implications of technological changes
+    on product design and the issuance of Engineering Change Orders (EDCs)?'
+- source_sentence: "search_document: 196  ◾  Production and Operations Management\
+    \ Systems\ndepleted, an order is placed for the EOQ, and further units are taken\
+    \ from Bin 1. Each \ntime Bin 2 is emptied, a new order is placed—it is equivalent\
+    \ to reaching the RP. The \ntwo-bin system is not feasible for many kinds of items.\
+    \ When applicable, much cleri-\ncal work is eliminated. This two-bin system is\
+    \ well suited to small items such as nuts, \nbolts, and fasteners. These are items\
+    \ too small and too numerous to make withdrawal \nentries for each transaction.\
+    \ The same reasoning applies to recording withdrawals of \nliquids, for which\
+    \ the two-bin system approach is also ideal. See, for example, the \napplication\
+    \ of two-bin system concept in effective management of a nursing ward for \nreplenishment\
+    \ of supplies method (http://www.hec.ca/pages/sylvain.landry/en).\n5.11 Periodic\
+    \ Review (Fixed Time) Inventory Systems\nPeriodic inventory systems are based\
+    \ on review of inventory levels at regular fixed \nreview periods. These systems\
+    \ were more popular than perpetual inventory systems \nbefore inventory information\
+    \ was digitized and put online. These were ideally suited for \nmanual entries\
+    \ and when actions should be taken periodically rather than randomly.\nComputers\
+    \ outmoded periodic manual systems primarily designed to save \nmoney on the clerical\
+    \ aspects of tracking inventory. However, periodic inventory \nsystems continue\
+    \ to be used for other reasons. These include requirements of suppli-\ners concerning\
+    \ the timing for accepting new orders, requirements of shippers about \ntiming\
+    \ deliveries, meeting the schedules of customers, and fulfilling the need to \n\
+    combine orders to obtain volumes sufficient for shipment discounts.\nSome organizations\
+    \ have central warehouses that will only accept orders from \ntheir regional distributors\
+    \ once in a week. Each region expects deliveries on a dif -\nferent day of the\
+    \ week. Further, some industries prefer the regularity of the periodic \nmethod,\
+    \ which can be linked to changeover intervals for production processes as \nwell\
+    \ as the phases of projects. For example, the stages of buildings must be synchro-\n\
+    nized with what suppliers deliver.\nPeriodic inventory systems also play a part\
+    \ in an advanced class of inventory \nmodels (called Ss policies) that combine\
+    \ the ordering rules of perpetual and peri -\nodic order systems to obtain lower\
+    \ total costs. These blended methods can be \nencountered in big inventory systems\
+    \ installations such as the Armed Forces use.\nThe optimal interval for periodic\
+    \ review, t0, is based on the square root relation-\nship given in the following\
+    \ equation:\n \nt S\nDH0 = 2 .\nThe equation for t0 can be derived as follows:\n\
+    \ \nt Q\nDD\nDS\nH\nS\nDH0\n0 12 2== ∗= ."
+  sentences:
+  - 'search_query: In the context of the linear breakeven chart, what does the vertical
+    distance between the fixed cost line and the total cost line represent?'
+  - 'search_query: In the context of the preface, how did the rise of complex and
+    large enterprises influence the development of quality management procedures?'
   - 'search_query: ---------------------'
-- source_sentence: "search_document: 26  •  Quality   Management:   Theory   and  \
-    \ Applicatio n\ns tatus r eporting\nThe next few blocks on the project plan in\
-    \ Table\n \n2.8 are status blocks, \nwhich are used to track the project’s progress\
-    \ as well as to record the \nplanned and actual, time and cost. The Achievement\
-    \ Index (AI) is calcu -\nlated by dividing the actual hours by the planned hours.\
-    \ An AI value of \nless than 1.00 represents underachievement. Accordingly, the\
-    \ Cost Index \n(CI) is calculated by dividing the actual cost (time and \n \n\
-    material) by the \nplanned cost. A CI value greater than 1.00 represents overexpenditure.\
-    \ \nThe overall Status Index (SI) is calculated by dividing the AI by the CI.\
-    \ An \nSI between .9 and 1.1 is normal; greater 1.3 or less than .7 would require\
-    \ \nimmediate attention.\nd\netail\nIn the body of the Gantt chart, the first\
-    \ column is used to identify the tasks \nto be performed. This may require you\
-    \ to break down a task into constituent \nparts called parent-child relationships.\
-    \ This can be seen in Table\n \n2.8, where \nthe study phase task is the parent\
-    \ and the steps below are the children belong-\ning to this task. Adjacent to\
-    \ each step is a reporting column for percentage \ncompleted, where we would designate\
-    \ what percentage of the step has been \nfinished. Next to this is a column which\
-    \ provides a graphical status indica-\ntor. The plot portion of the chart shows\
-    \ a bar for the duration of the task or \nstep in which black represents completion\
-    \ and gray indicates the scheduled \ntime allotted. The bar turns black as the\
-    \ project progresses based upon the \npercentage completed. From Table\n \n2.9,\
-    \ you can see that the feature listing \nstep has not been started, even though\
-    \ it was scheduled to start in week 7.\nPr O duct Quality Planning\ng eneral i\
-    \ nformation\nAt last, we have come to the actual product or service itself. Product\
-    \ quality \nplanning (see Table\n \n2.9) is by no means the last step; in fact,\
-    \ it starts when \nthe product is being designed. This should be part of the design\
-    \ test phase \noutputs prior to the actual design testing. Typically, this plan\
-    \ is developed \nconjointly with the product illustrations (e.g., drawings and\
-    \ schematics), \nbill of materials, and production work order. These plans are\
-    \ utilized in raw \n© 2010 by Taylor and Francis Group, LLC"
+- source_sentence: "search_document: 82  •  Quality   Management:   Theory   and  \
+    \ Applicatio n\nsimilar disadvantages to an authoritarian style though, with employees\
+    \ \nbecoming highly dependent on the leader. If the wrong decisions are made,\
+    \ \nthen all employees may become dissatisfied with the leader.\nDemocratic\n\
+    In a democratic style, the manager allows the employees to take part in deci-\n\
+    sion making; therefore, everything is agreed on by the majority. The com-\nmunication\
+    \ is extensive in both directions (from subordinates to leaders \nand vice versa).\
+    \ This style can be particularly useful when complex decisions \nneed to be made\
+    \ that require a range of specialist skills: for example, when \na new information\
+    \ and communication technologies (ICT) system needs \nto be put in place and the\
+    \ upper management of the business is computer \nilliterate. From the overall\
+    \ business’ point of view, job satisfaction and qual-\nity of work will improve.\
+    \ However, the decision-making process is severely \nslowed down, and the need\
+    \ for a consensus may lead to not taking the “best” \ndecision for the business.\
+    \ It can go against a better choice of action.\nLaissez-Faire\nIn a laissez-faire\
+    \ leadership style, the leader’s role is peripheral and staff man-\nages their\
+    \ own areas of the business; the leader therefore evades the duties of \nmanagement,\
+    \ and uncoordinated delegation occurs. The communication in \nthis style is horizontal,\
+    \ meaning that it is equal in both directions; however, \nvery little communication\
+    \ occurs in comparison with other styles. The style \nbrings out the best in highly\
+    \ professional and creative groups of employees; \nhowever, in many cases it is\
+    \ not deliberate and is simply a result of poor \nmanagement. This leads to a\
+    \ lack of staff focus and sense of direction, which \nin turn leads to much dissatisfaction\
+    \ and a poor company image.\nr ewards b ased u PO n Per FO rmance\nA psychological\
+    \ reward is a process that reinforces behavior—something \nthat, when offered,\
+    \ causes a behavior to increase in intensity. Reward is \nan operational concept\
+    \ for describing the positive value an individual \nascribes to an object, behavioral\
+    \ act, or internal physical state. Primary \n© 2010 by Taylor and Francis Group,\
+    \ LLC"
   sentences:
-  - 'search_query: In the context of production and operations management systems,
-    what are the key differences between the Level plan and the Chase plan?'
-  - 'search_query: In the context of Production and Operations Management Systems,
-    how do blue and red ocean strategies differ, and why are closed-loop supply chains
-    becoming increasingly important?'
-  - 'search_query: In the context of project management, what is the Achievement Index
-    (AI) and how is it calculated?'
+  - 'search_query: In the context of forecasting demand for the next year, what is
+    the significance of the ''Average SI'' (Seasonal Index) in the calculation of
+    forecasted demand for each quarter?'
+  - 'search_query: Workload Assessment (Forecasting)   ◾  115'
+  - 'search_query: In the context of leadership styles, which style is characterized
+    by extensive communication in both directions and is particularly useful when
+    complex decisions need to be made that require a range of specialist skills?'
+- source_sentence: "search_document: 386  ◾  Production and Operations Management\
+    \ Systems\n10.8  Location Decisions Using the Transportation \nModel\nTransportation\
+    \ costs are a primary concern for a new start-up company or division. \nThis also\
+    \ applies to an existing company that intends to relocate. Finally, it should\
+    \ \nbe common practice to reevaluate the current location of an ongoing business\
+    \ so \nthat the impact of changing conditions and new opportunities are not overlooked.\
+    \ \nWhen shipping costs are critical for the location decision, the transportation\
+    \ model \n(TM) can determine minimum cost or maximum profit solutions that specify\
+    \ opti-\nmal shipping patterns between many locations.\nTransportation costs include\
+    \ the combined costs of moving raw materials to \nthe plant and of transporting\
+    \ finished goods from the plant to one or more ware -\nhouses. It is easier to\
+    \ explain the TM with the following numerical example than \nwith abstract math\
+    \ equations. A doll manufacturer has decided to build a fac -\ntory in the center\
+    \ of the United States. More specifically, Missouri and Ohio are \nidentified\
+    \ as the potential states. Several sites in the two regions have been identi -\n\
+    fied. Two cities have been chosen as candidates. These are St Louis, Missouri,\
+    \ and \nColumbus, Ohio. Real-estate costs are about equal in both. The problem\
+    \ is to \nselect one of the two cities. The decision will be based on the shipping\
+    \ (transporta -\ntion) costs.\n10.8.1 Shipping (Transportation or Distribution)\
+    \ Costs\nThe average cost of shipping (also known as the cost of distribution\
+    \ or cost of trans-\nportation) the components that the company uses to the Columbus,\
+    \ Ohio, location \nis $6 per production unit. Shipping costs average only $3 per\
+    \ unit to St Louis, \nMissouri. In TM terminology, shippers (suppliers, in this\
+    \ case) are called sources or \norigins. Those receiving shipments (producers,\
+    \ in this case) are called destinations.\nThe average cost of shipping from the\
+    \ Columbus, Ohio, location to the \n market—distributor’s warehouse is $2 per\
+    \ unit. The average cost of shipping from \nSt Louis, Missouri, to the market—distributor’s\
+    \ warehouse is $4 per unit. The same \nterminology applies. The shipper is the\
+    \ producer (source or origin) and the receivers \nare the distributors or customers\
+    \ (destinations). The configuration of origins and \ndestinations are shown in\
+    \ Figure 10.1.\nTotal transportation costs to and from the Columbus, Ohio, plant\
+    \ are \n$6 + $2 = $8 per unit; for St Louis, Missouri, they are $3 + $4 = $7.\
+    \ Other things \nbeing equal, the company should choose St Louis, Missouri. However,\
+    \ the real \nworld is not as simple as this.\nThe problem becomes more complex\
+    \ when there are a number of origins com -\npeting for shipments to a number of\
+    \ destinations. We will illustrate the com -\nplexity of the problem and its solution\
+    \ using the example of Rukna Auto Parts \nManufacturing Company."
+  sentences:
+  - 'search_query: ---------------------'
+  - 'search_query: What is the primary objective of loading in the production scheduling
+    process?'
+  - 'search_query: In the context of the Transportation Model (TM), what are the primary
+    considerations for a company when deciding on a new location for its operations?'
 pipeline_tag: sentence-similarity
 library_name: sentence-transformers
 metrics:
@@ -237,49 +243,49 @@ model-index:
       type: dim_384
     metrics:
     - type: cosine_accuracy@1
-      value: 0.6439393939393939
+      value: 0.6893939393939394
       name: Cosine Accuracy@1
     - type: cosine_accuracy@3
-      value: 0.7727272727272727
+      value: 0.803030303030303
       name: Cosine Accuracy@3
     - type: cosine_accuracy@5
-      value: 0.8181818181818182
+      value: 0.8484848484848485
       name: Cosine Accuracy@5
     - type: cosine_accuracy@10
-      value: 0.8484848484848485
+      value: 0.8863636363636364
       name: Cosine Accuracy@10
     - type: cosine_precision@1
-      value: 0.6439393939393939
+      value: 0.6893939393939394
       name: Cosine Precision@1
     - type: cosine_precision@3
-      value: 0.2575757575757575
+      value: 0.2676767676767676
       name: Cosine Precision@3
     - type: cosine_precision@5
-      value: 0.16363636363636358
+      value: 0.16969696969696965
       name: Cosine Precision@5
     - type: cosine_precision@10
-      value: 0.08484848484848484
+      value: 0.08863636363636362
       name: Cosine Precision@10
     - type: cosine_recall@1
-      value: 0.6439393939393939
+      value: 0.6893939393939394
       name: Cosine Recall@1
     - type: cosine_recall@3
-      value: 0.7727272727272727
+      value: 0.803030303030303
       name: Cosine Recall@3
     - type: cosine_recall@5
-      value: 0.8181818181818182
+      value: 0.8484848484848485
       name: Cosine Recall@5
     - type: cosine_recall@10
-      value: 0.8484848484848485
+      value: 0.8863636363636364
       name: Cosine Recall@10
     - type: cosine_ndcg@10
-      value: 0.7530926665244366
+      value: 0.7854028590069935
       name: Cosine Ndcg@10
     - type: cosine_mrr@10
-      value: 0.7219065656565657
+      value: 0.7530934343434343
       name: Cosine Mrr@10
     - type: cosine_map@100
-      value: 0.7266266223983144
+      value: 0.7569319824286133
       name: Cosine Map@100
 ---
 
@@ -333,9 +339,9 @@ from sentence_transformers import SentenceTransformer
 model = SentenceTransformer("MistyDragon/bge-small-finetuned")
 # Run inference
 sentences = [
-    'search_document: 26\u2002 •\u2002 Quality \u2002 Management: \u2002 Theory \u2002 and \u2002 Applicatio n\ns tatus r eporting\nThe next few blocks on the project plan in Table\n \n2.8 are status blocks, \nwhich are used to track the project’s progress as well as to record the \nplanned and actual, time and cost. The Achievement Index (AI) is calcu -\nlated by dividing the actual hours by the planned hours. An AI value of \nless than 1.00 represents underachievement. Accordingly, the Cost Index \n(CI) is calculated by dividing the actual cost (time and \n \nmaterial) by the \nplanned cost. A CI value greater than 1.00 represents overexpenditure. \nThe overall Status Index (SI) is calculated by dividing the AI by the CI. An \nSI between .9 and 1.1 is normal; greater 1.3 or less than .7 would require \nimmediate attention.\nd\netail\nIn the body of the Gantt chart, the first column is used to identify the tasks \nto be performed. This may require you to break down a task into constituent \nparts called parent-child relationships. This can be seen in Table\n \n2.8, where \nthe study phase task is the parent and the steps below are the children belong-\ning to this task. Adjacent to each step is a reporting column for percentage \ncompleted, where we would designate what percentage of the step has been \nfinished. Next to this is a column which provides a graphical status indica-\ntor. The plot portion of the chart shows a bar for the duration of the task or \nstep in which black represents completion and gray indicates the scheduled \ntime allotted. The bar turns black as the project progresses based upon the \npercentage completed. From Table\n \n2.9, you can see that the feature listing \nstep has not been started, even though it was scheduled to start in week 7.\nPr O duct Quality Planning\ng eneral i nformation\nAt last, we have come to the actual product or service itself. Product quality \nplanning (see Table\n \n2.9) is by no means the last step; in fact, it starts when \nthe product is being designed. This should be part of the design test phase \noutputs prior to the actual design testing. Typically, this plan is developed \nconjointly with the product illustrations (e.g., drawings and schematics), \nbill of materials, and production work order. These plans are utilized in raw \n© 2010 by Taylor and Francis Group, LLC',
-    'search_query: In the context of project management, what is the Achievement Index (AI) and how is it calculated?',
-    'search_query: In the context of Production and Operations Management Systems, how do blue and red ocean strategies differ, and why are closed-loop supply chains becoming increasingly important?',
+    'search_document: 386\u2003 ◾\u2003 Production and Operations Management Systems\n10.8  Location Decisions Using the Transportation \nModel\nTransportation costs are a primary concern for a new start-up company or division. \nThis also applies to an existing company that intends to relocate. Finally, it should \nbe common practice to reevaluate the current location of an ongoing business so \nthat the impact of changing conditions and new opportunities are not overlooked. \nWhen shipping costs are critical for the location decision, the transportation model \n(TM) can determine minimum cost or maximum profit solutions that specify opti-\nmal shipping patterns between many locations.\nTransportation costs include the combined costs of moving raw materials to \nthe plant and of transporting finished goods from the plant to one or more ware -\nhouses. It is easier to explain the TM with the following numerical example than \nwith abstract math equations. A doll manufacturer has decided to build a fac -\ntory in the center of the United States. More specifically, Missouri and Ohio are \nidentified as the potential states. Several sites in the two regions have been identi -\nfied. Two cities have been chosen as candidates. These are St Louis, Missouri, and \nColumbus, Ohio. Real-estate costs are about equal in both. The problem is to \nselect one of the two cities. The decision will be based on the shipping (transporta -\ntion) costs.\n10.8.1 Shipping (Transportation or Distribution) Costs\nThe average cost of shipping (also known as the cost of distribution or cost of trans-\nportation) the components that the company uses to the Columbus, Ohio, location \nis $6 per production unit. Shipping costs average only $3 per unit to St Louis, \nMissouri. In TM terminology, shippers (suppliers, in this case) are called sources or \norigins. Those receiving shipments (producers, in this case) are called destinations.\nThe average cost of shipping from the Columbus, Ohio, location to the \n market—distributor’s warehouse is $2 per unit. The average cost of shipping from \nSt Louis, Missouri, to the market—distributor’s warehouse is $4 per unit. The same \nterminology applies. The shipper is the producer (source or origin) and the receivers \nare the distributors or customers (destinations). The configuration of origins and \ndestinations are shown in Figure 10.1.\nTotal transportation costs to and from the Columbus, Ohio, plant are \n$6 + $2 = $8 per unit; for St Louis, Missouri, they are $3 + $4 = $7. Other things \nbeing equal, the company should choose St Louis, Missouri. However, the real \nworld is not as simple as this.\nThe problem becomes more complex when there are a number of origins com -\npeting for shipments to a number of destinations. We will illustrate the com -\nplexity of the problem and its solution using the example of Rukna Auto Parts \nManufacturing Company.',
+    'search_query: In the context of the Transportation Model (TM), what are the primary considerations for a company when deciding on a new location for its operations?',
+    'search_query: What is the primary objective of loading in the production scheduling process?',
 ]
 embeddings = model.encode(sentences)
 print(embeddings.shape)
@@ -344,9 +350,9 @@ print(embeddings.shape)
 # Get the similarity scores for the embeddings
 similarities = model.similarity(embeddings, embeddings)
 print(similarities)
-# tensor([[1.0000, 0.7025, 0.2691],
-#         [0.7025, 1.0000, 0.2376],
-#         [0.2691, 0.2376, 1.0000]])
+# tensor([[1.0000, 0.7613, 0.4329],
+#         [0.7613, 1.0000, 0.4239],
+#         [0.4329, 0.4239, 1.0000]])
 ```
 
 <!--
@@ -389,21 +395,21 @@ You can finetune this model on your own dataset.
 
 | Metric              | Value      |
 |:--------------------|:-----------|
-| cosine_accuracy@1   | 0.6439     |
-| cosine_accuracy@3   | 0.7727     |
-| cosine_accuracy@5   | 0.8182     |
-| cosine_accuracy@10  | 0.8485     |
-| cosine_precision@1  | 0.6439     |
-| cosine_precision@3  | 0.2576     |
-| cosine_precision@5  | 0.1636     |
-| cosine_precision@10 | 0.0848     |
-| cosine_recall@1     | 0.6439     |
-| cosine_recall@3     | 0.7727     |
-| cosine_recall@5     | 0.8182     |
-| cosine_recall@10    | 0.8485     |
-| **cosine_ndcg@10**  | **0.7531** |
-| cosine_mrr@10       | 0.7219     |
-| cosine_map@100      | 0.7266     |
+| cosine_accuracy@1   | 0.6894     |
+| cosine_accuracy@3   | 0.803      |
+| cosine_accuracy@5   | 0.8485     |
+| cosine_accuracy@10  | 0.8864     |
+| cosine_precision@1  | 0.6894     |
+| cosine_precision@3  | 0.2677     |
+| cosine_precision@5  | 0.1697     |
+| cosine_precision@10 | 0.0886     |
+| cosine_recall@1     | 0.6894     |
+| cosine_recall@3     | 0.803      |
+| cosine_recall@5     | 0.8485     |
+| cosine_recall@10    | 0.8864     |
+| **cosine_ndcg@10**  | **0.7854** |
+| cosine_mrr@10       | 0.7531     |
+| cosine_map@100      | 0.7569     |
 
 <!--
 ## Bias, Risks and Limitations
@@ -426,16 +432,16 @@ You can finetune this model on your own dataset.
 * Size: 525 training samples
 * Columns: <code>positive</code> and <code>anchor</code>
 * Approximate statistics based on the first 525 samples:
-  |         | positive                                                                             | anchor                                                                           |
-  |:--------|:-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|:---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
-  | type    | string                                                                               | string                                                                           |
-  | details | <ul><li>min: 11 tokens</li><li>mean: 431.16 tokens</li><li>max: 512 tokens</li></ul> | <ul><li>min: 7 tokens</li><li>mean: 30.2 tokens</li><li>max: 96 tokens</li></ul> |
+  |         | positive                                                                             | anchor                                                                             |
+  |:--------|:-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|:-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
+  | type    | string                                                                               | string                                                                             |
+  | details | <ul><li>min: 11 tokens</li><li>mean: 432.37 tokens</li><li>max: 512 tokens</li></ul> | <ul><li>min: 7 tokens</li><li>mean: 30.53 tokens</li><li>max: 103 tokens</li></ul> |
 * Samples:
-  | positive                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 | anchor                                                                                                  |
-  |:---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|:--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
-  | <code>search_document: Strategy, Productivity, and History  ◾  61<br> 1. Demand volume falls as price rises, but this is also relative to what prices com-<br>petitors charge. When a competitor lowers prices, it is equivalent to a price <br>increase for the customer who stays with a supplier who does not lower prices.<br> 2. To be competitive, it is often necessary to find ways to match price decreases <br>offered by competitors. This is a price–demand volume elasticity issue that <br>assumes quality is unchanged.<br> 3. If marketing lowers the price, then the profit margin will decrease.<br> 4. P/OM is always trying to find a way to decrease total variable cost without <br>degrading quality. For example, if a new material is developed that is as good <br>as the old material but costs less, then P/OM shifts to the new material. This <br>initiative is called value analysis.<br> 5. The only way to achieve number 4 is to work smarter, and this is facili -<br>tated by means of technology-based or methodology-based productivity <br>improv...</code>       | <code>search_query: Strategy, Productivity, and History</code>                                          |
-  | <code>search_document: 10  ◾  Production and Operations Management Systems<br>Even though the problem solution may be assigned to the operations management <br>team, the resolution requires cooperation of all the organizational participants in <br>the problem.<br>1.5.4 Structure of the Systems Approach<br>The systems approach requires identification of all the elements related to purposes <br>and goals. The question to be answered: What accounts for the attainment of the <br>goals?<br> 1. The visual concept depicted in Figure 1.3 is one way of answering the <br>question.<br> 2. Another way is to use a mathematical model that shows what accounts for <br>the performance of the system and the attainment of its goals. The equation <br>shown here can be read as “The goals yi are a function of all relevant factors xj <br>and tj.” That is,<br> {} {, ,, ;, ,, }.yf xx xt ttij j= 12 12/midhorizellipsis/midhorizellipsis (1.1)<br> 3. The systems approach requires control of timing. It is to be noted that <br>Equation 1.1 includes measures of time ( t...</code> | <code>search_query: ---------------------</code>                                                        |
-  | <code>search_document: Inventory Management  ◾  177<br>year starts with an inventory level of 600 units that becomes zero at the end <br>of sixth month. The average inventory during the first 6 months is, therefore, <br>(600 + 0)/2 = 300. At the end of the sixth month, an additional 600 units are <br>purchased that raises the inventory level to 600 again. The inventory level is zero <br>again at the end of the year. So the average inventory during the last 6 months <br>is also (600 + 0)/2 = 300. In other words, the average inventory throughout the <br>year is 300 = 600/2 = Q/2. Figure 5.4 shows the inventory level variations if <br>0123456<br>Month<br>7891 01 11 2<br>300<br>400<br>500<br>600<br>Inventory<br>Inventory level variations<br>200<br>100<br>0<br>Figure 5.3 Order size, Q = 600.<br>012345 6<br>Month<br>Inventory level variations<br>78 91 01 11 2<br>300<br>400Inventory<br>200<br>100<br>0<br>Figure 5.4 Order size, Q = 400.</code>                                                                                                                    | <code>search_query: What is the average inventory level during the first six months of the year?</code> |
+  | positive                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             | anchor                                                                                                                                                                                                    |
+  |:---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|:----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
+  | <code>search_document: 9192 0.9207 0.9222 0.9236 0.9215 0.9265 0.9279 0.9292 0.9306 0.9319<br>1.5 0.9332 0.9345 0.9357 0.9370 0.9382 0.9394 0.9406 0.9418 0.9492 0.9441<br>1.6 0.9452 0.9463 0.9474 0.9484 0.9495 0.9505 0.9515 0.9525 0.9535 0.9545<br>1.7 0.9554 0.9564 0.9573 0.9582 0.9591 0.9599 0.9608 0.9616 0.9625 0.9633</code>                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             | <code>search_query: What is the value of the function at x = 1.5?</code>                                                                                                                                  |
+  | <code>search_document: 72  •  Quality   Management:   Theory   and   Applicatio n<br>secondary school, or gymnasium. Tertiary education normally includes <br>undergraduate and postgraduate education, as well as vocational educa -<br>tion and training. Colleges and universities are the main institutions that <br>provide tertiary education. Tertiary education generally results in the <br>receipt of certificates, diplomas, or academic degrees.<br>Higher education includes the teaching, research, and social services <br>activities of universities, and within the realm of teaching, it includes <br>both<br> <br>the undergraduate level (sometimes referred to as tertiary education) <br>and the graduate (or postgraduate) level (sometimes referred to as gradu-<br>ate school). Higher education in the United States and Canada generally <br>involves work toward a degree-level or foundation degree qualification. <br>In most developed countries, a high proportion of the population (up to <br>50<br> <br>percent) now enters higher education at some time in t...</code>          | <code>search_query: What is the primary difference between tertiary and higher education as described in the document?</code>                                                                             |
+  | <code>search_document: 273<br>Chapter 8<br>Quality Management<br>Readers’ Choice—“Quality means doing it <br>right when no one is looking.”—Henry Ford<br>Apte, U.M., and Reynolds, C.C., Quality Management at <br>Kentucky Fried Chicken, Interfaces, 25(3), 1995, p. 6. The pro-<br>gram developed by Kentucky Fried Chicken (KFC) Corp. to <br>improve service quality is used as a benchmark for continuous <br>process improvement by all KFC stores. The reduced service <br>time as a result of this program is one of the measurements of <br>quality.<br>Crosby, P.B., Quality is Free (The Art of Making Quality <br>Certain). McGraw-Hill, 1979. Crosby (1979) demanded a zero-<br>defects goal which treats any failures as intolerable.<br>Harris, C.R., and Yit, W., Successfully Implementing Statistical <br>Process Control in Integrated Steel Companies, Interfaces, 24(5), <br>1994, p. 49. Implementation processes of statistical process con-<br>trol (SPC) projects were analyzed at 12 integrated steel compa-<br>nies to identify key success (and failure) factors.<br>Hossein...</code> | <code>search_query: In the context of the document, which company developed a program to improve service quality that is used as a benchmark for continuous process improvement by all KFC stores?</code> |
 * Loss: [<code>MultipleNegativesRankingLoss</code>](https://sbert.net/docs/package_reference/sentence_transformer/losses.html#multiplenegativesrankingloss) with these parameters:
   ```json
   {
@@ -589,14 +595,14 @@ You can finetune this model on your own dataset.
 ### Training Logs
 | Epoch   | Step   | Training Loss | dim_384_cosine_ndcg@10 |
 |:-------:|:------:|:-------------:|:----------------------:|
-| -1      | -1     | -             | 0.7053                 |
-| 1.0     | 9      | -             | 0.7422                 |
-| 1.1212  | 10     | 0.5524        | -                      |
-| 2.0     | 18     | -             | 0.7484                 |
-| 2.2424  | 20     | 0.2751        | -                      |
-| 3.0     | 27     | -             | 0.7528                 |
-| 3.3636  | 30     | 0.2275        | -                      |
-| **4.0** | **36** | **-**         | **0.7531**             |
+| -1      | -1     | -             | 0.7432                 |
+| 1.0     | 9      | -             | 0.7747                 |
+| 1.1212  | 10     | 0.5749        | -                      |
+| 2.0     | 18     | -             | 0.7759                 |
+| 2.2424  | 20     | 0.3087        | -                      |
+| 3.0     | 27     | -             | 0.7814                 |
+| 3.3636  | 30     | 0.2328        | -                      |
+| **4.0** | **36** | **-**         | **0.7854**             |
 
 * The bold row denotes the saved checkpoint.