Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 1003.3766

Modelling and simulating retail management practices: a first approach

Peer-Olaf Siebers·Uwe Aickelin·Helen Celia·Chris Clegg
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Multi-agent systems offer a new and exciting way of understanding the world of work. We apply agent-based modeling and simulation to investigate a set of problems in a retail context. Specifically, we are working to understand the relationship between people management practices on the shop-floor and retail performance. Despite the fact we are working within a relatively novel and complex domain, it is clear that using an agent-based approach offers great potential for improving organizational capabilities in the future. Our multi-disciplinary research team has worked closely with one of the UK's top ten retailers to collect data and build an understanding of shop-floor operations and the key actors in a department (customers, staff, and managers). Based on this case study we have built and tested our first version of a retail branch agent-based simulation model where we have focused on how we can simulate the effects of people management practices on customer satisfaction and sales. In our experiments we have looked at employee development and cashier empowerment as two examples of shop floor management practices. In this paper we describe the underlying conceptual ideas and the features of our simulation model. We present a selection of experiments we have conducted in order to validate our simulation model and to show its potential for answering "what-if" questions in a retail context. We also introduce a novel performance measure which we have created to quantify customers' satisfaction with service, based on their individual shopping experiences.

Explore related subjects

cs.AIcs.CEcs.MA

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Peer-Olaf Siebers, Uwe Aickelin, Helen Celia, Chris Clegg. 2010-03-19. Modelling and simulating retail management practices: a first approach. https://arxiv.org/abs/1003.3766

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Decoupling Readiness from Release for Tail-Aware Scheduling of Agentic LLM Workflows

Agentic LLM workflows consist of sequences of model turns interleaved with tool interactions, so their end-to-end completion time depends not only on inference speed but also on when ready turns are released. Most runtimes release each turn immediately upon readiness. Under contention, this eager release policy can accumulate released but unfinished work; once submitted, those turns can no longer be reordered by the workflow-level policy, increasing tail latency. We present a tail-risk-aware turn release scheduling method that jointly decides which ready turn to release next and how much released but unfinished work to maintain. The method uses a mean--Conditional Value-at-Risk (CVaR) objective to capture the evolving tail risk of unfinished workflows, incorporates online estimates of turn work when prioritizing ready turns, and adapts the released work budget to observed queue pressure. We evaluate the method using real agent execution traces from software engineering tasks across multiple LLMs and workflow arrival rates. The method performs comparably to eager release under light load and substantially reduces the P95 of workflow flow time under contention, achieving up to a \(3.50\times\) speedup.

cs.AI↗
arXiv2026

Demystifying the Privacy-Utility Trade-off in LLM Interactions

The integration of Large Language Models into daily tasks relies on context-rich instructions, inevitably exposing sensitive user information. Current privacy-preserving methods typically employ context-agnostic static rules, causing severe utility degradation. However, the specific mechanisms governing how sanitization impacts downstream performance remain largely underexplored. To address this, we conduct a systematic analysis to deconstruct the privacy-utility trade-off, uncovering three underlying mechanisms: (1) Context-Dependent Utility, which first establishes when to sanitize by revealing that data value shifts from critical constraints to dispensable noise based on user intent; (2) Strategic Adaptation, which subsequently determines how to sanitize by dictating that the choice between removal and replacement depends on the task's reliance on factual integrity versus structural coherence; and (3) Combinatorial Interplay, which finally extends the protection scope by demonstrating that attributes form a semantic web of synergistic dependencies or antagonistic redundancies. Guided by these insights, we introduce an intent-driven local protection framework. By distilling a lightweight model Veilmind-4B to drive a dynamic extraction-sanitization-restoration pipeline, our approach reaches a low-leakage privacy point while preserving substantially higher response utility than existing privacy-oriented baselines, advancing the privacy-utility trade-off toward the Pareto frontier.

cs.AI↗
arXiv2026

Defining AI Agents: A Compendium of Criteria, Metrics, and Benchmarks

The term agent in artificial intelligence lacks a standard definition, complicating the evaluation, comparison, and reproducibility of AI agent research. We address this ambiguity through a survey organized around five dimensions of agenticness: environmental interaction, learning and adaptation, autonomy, goal-directed behavior, and temporal coherence. For each dimension, we examine how the underlying capability has been conceptualized across prior work and synthesize the metrics, benchmarks, and evaluation frameworks used to assess it. This review provides a structured account of the current landscape of agent evaluation, highlighting both established approaches and areas where evaluation remains limited or inconsistent. We additionally introduce the Agent Compendium, a public-facing digital resource that organizes and extends the evaluation methods identified through this review. Together, the survey and compendium provide a common structure for evaluating and comparing agent capabilities across AI systems, supporting more reproducible research, clearer communication, and more systematic study of artificial agents.

cs.AI↗