Journal Pre-proofs

Review

Artificial Intelligence Applications in Supply Chain: A Descriptive Bibliomet‐

ric Analysis and Future Research Directions

Youssra Riahi, Tarik Saikouk, Angappa Gunasekaran, Ismail Badraoui

PII: S0957-4174(21)00143-3
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2021.114702
Reference: ESWA 114702

To appear in: Expert Systems with Applications

Received Date: 19 November 2020

Revised Date: 17 January 2021
Accepted Date: 6 February 2021

Please cite this article as: Riahi, Y., Saikouk, T., Gunasekaran, A., Badraoui, I., Artificial Intelligence
Applications in Supply Chain: A Descriptive Bibliometric Analysis and Future Research Directions, Expert
Systems with Applications (2021), doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2021.114702

This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover
page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version
will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are
providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors
may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

 Artificial Intelligence Applications in Supply Chain: A Descriptive Bibliometric Analysis
and Future Research Directions

Youssra Riahi
Department of Supply chain Management, Rabat Business School,
International University of Rabat, Rabat, Morocco
youssra.riahi@uir.ac.ma

Tarik Saikouk*
Excelia Business School, CERIIM, La Rochelle, France
saikoukt@excelia-group.com

Angappa Gunasekaran
School of Business and Public Administration, California State University, Bakersfield,
USA
agunasekaran@csub.edu

Ismail Badraoui
Department of Supply chain Management, Rabat Business School,
International University of Rabat, Rabat, Morocco
Ismail.badraoui@uir.ac.ma

*Corresponding author
Abstract
Today’s supply chains are very different from those of just a few years ago, and they continue to
evolve within an extremely competitive economy. Dynamic supply chain processes require a
technology that can cope with their increasing complexity. In recent years, several functional supply
chain applications based on artificial intelligence (AI) have emerged, yet very few studies have
addressed the applications of AI in supply chain processes. Machine learning, natural language
processing, and robotics are all potential enablers of supply chain transformation. Aware of the
potential advantages of AI implementation in supply chains and of the paucity of work done regarding
it, we explore what researchers have done so far with respect to AI and what needs further exploration.
We reviewed 136 research papers published between 1996 and 2020 from the Scopus database and
provided a classification of the research material according to four critical structural dimensions (
level of analytics, AI algorithms or techniques, sector or industry of application, and supply chain
processes). This study is the first attempt to study the AI applications in SC from a process perspective
and provides a decisional framework for adequate use of AI techniques in the different SC processes.
Keywords: artificial intelligence, supply chain, bibliometric analysis, systematic literature review,
classification
1. Introduction
Supply chains play a crucial role in quality customer experiences, cost control, and a company’s
agility in the face of market opportunities and uncertainties. Companies seek speed, reliability, and
traceability whilst considering their cost imperatives, deadlines, and inventory optimization (Collin
et al, 2009; Cao & Zhang, 2011; Zhang et al, 2016). Supply chain managers should monitor and
avoid incidents and factors that disrupt the supply process—from the most common incidents
(delivery delays, quality defects, etc.) to major events (political unrest, natural disasters, suppliers’
financial instability, etc.). These factors could cause supply chain complexity in already uncertain
environments.
According to Mentzer et al. (2001), “a supply chain is the network of organizations that are
involved, through upstream and downstream linkages, in the different processes and activities that
produce value in the form of products and services delivered to the ultimate consumer.” To work
well in the complex environments in which supply chains operate—and to create more agile and
resilient supply chains—these linkages, processes, and activities require monitoring, forecasting,
prediction, and optimization. In recent years, applications based on artificial intelligence (AI) have
emerged in several different fields including supply chains (Borges et al, 2020).
AI enables systems to make resourceful decisions and execute tasks automatically without
human intervention.
Companies exploit AI and machine learning to gain insights into various areas, including
warehousing, logistics, and supply chain management. AI definition tend to differ based on the
perspective from which we wish to define it. A restrictive definition of AI can encompass every
machine or equipment that uses computational abilities to mimic human intelligence. There are
many definitions of AI depending on what AI achieves, and are generally classified into four
categories on the basis of the factor of a thinking human being and in terms of rational behavior: (i)
systems that think and act like a human being; and (ii) systems that think and act rationally.
From a general perspective, AI can be defined as the ability of a system to reproduce human
intelligence, with the ideal characteristic to rationalize and take actions that have the highest
tendency of achieving a specific goal (Čerka et al, 2015).
AI makes it possible to implement predictive approaches that allow rapid assessment and more
effective minimization of the risks or disruptive events that could occur throughout the supply chain;
it also enables users to distinguish patterns in the supply chain. Using algorithms, AI can clearly and
quickly identify relevant supply chain data to develop models that enable managers to better
understand how each process works and to discover areas for improvement (Ni et al, 2020). In this
new approach of using AI to improve the supply chain and search for optimization, AI enables
companies to constantly learn about areas that require improvement, to identify factors that affect
performance, and to predict performance.
AI in the supply chain context remains an innovation with a full potential which we have yet to
understand. The extant literature is limited in terms of AI applications in the supply chain field.
With this study, we aim to provide a comprehensive view of AI applications in supply chains, which
will serve as a reference for future researchers and practitioners. We address the knowledge gap by
answering the following research questions:

RQ1: What are the general research trends of AI applications in supply chains?
RQ2: What are the supply chain outcomes that AI achieves?
RQ3: What level of AI drives such outcomes?

Using these research questions as a starting point, we conduct a systematic review combined
with a bibliometric analysis of the extant literature to identify prior research exploring AI in the
supply chain context. We perform a descriptive analysis to answer the research questions, the results
of which academics and practitioners can use as a reference to track the evolution of research and
to envision the potential future trends of AI applications in the supply chain domain. Since in the
literature, there was no systematic examination on the AI application, in particular in SC from a
process perspective, the exploration of the existing research works was deemed necessary to
contribute to the body of knowledge and to address the existing gaps that should be addressed in
future research.
The findings of this research intend to constitute a starting point for further investigations
regarding the application of AI in the different supply chain processes and areas, and provide a
framework for practitioners in the field for a successful implementation of AI techniques. The
analysis allowed to identify the different AI techniques usage patterns according to SC processes,
which in turn allowed to develop a decisional framework for AI techniques choice according to the
different SC processes. The rest of the paper is structured as follows: Section 2 presents a review of
the literature. Section 3 outlines the adopted methodology. Section 4 presents the findings and the
analysis, followed by the classification results in Section 5. Section 6 discusses the findings, and
Section 7 presents the developed framework. Section 8 explains the implications of the study,
followed by Section 9 in which the limitations are listed, and finally Section 10 as a conclusion.
2. Review of literature
As globalization continues, businesses are looking ahead to optimize their supply chain and
develop their capabilities, which brings many changes to the market, demand, data availability,
management and more. These changes require the concerned business organizations to follow up in
order to maintain their competitiveness by avoiding demand uncertainty, disruptions, and financial
risk. Thus, many capabilities should be developed within SCs to ensure the highest rankings in the
global competition (Giannakis and Papadopoulos, 2016). Since the world has been moving towards
a digital future over the years, one of the most outstanding technologies that could assist in the
enhancement of SCs capabilities, thus of its transformation, is artificial intelligence. AI is a
technology that has been applied for many years but is still far from being fully utilized in SC.Yet,
only recently have technological developments shown that AI has many applications (Min, 2010).
In addition to its increasing adoption in industry, AI shows a growing and extensive presence
in the scholarly discourse, and this presence can be noticed in many fields. Although research
regarding AI is being conducted, there is a need to explore the contribution of AI to the field of SC.
There is no systematic reviews entirely devoted to the AI applications in SC. Usually,
researchers focuses on AI for supply chain management (SCM), thus restricting their research to the
managerial aspect and excluding the process perspective in which a researcher can consider the
applications of AI in the different processes of the SC. It is also important to note that even with the
limited focus of researcher, only few studies considered AI applications in SCM (Min, 2010; Ngai
et al, 2014). The work of Min (Min, 2010) was the first work in which the author conducted a
review on AI applications in SCM. The author selected 28 articles related to AI tools and SCM
activities, and extracted seven AI tools and reviewed their applications in eight SCM activities. Ngai
et al., 2014; reviewed 77 articles from 1994 and attempted to explore. the applications of seven AI
techniques in the SCM of textile and apparel industry. The results of this review claimed that the
gaps between AI techniques and SCM were caused by the unbalanced applications of certain ML
algorithms like NNs (Ni et al, 2020). The articles identified above did presented some insights of
the AI applications in SCM, but they all failed to produce a systematic review. This remark is
formulated with consideration that these research works are specifically devoted to SCM. To
conclude, it is important to mention that even from a managerial perspective in which research
studies have been conducted, the research works still have gaps and failed to conduct a systematic
literature review. The applications of AI in SC from a process perspective is still not covered in the
existing literature and this work is the first attempt.
3. Methods
Based on the study objectives, we followed a specific methodology for material collection, tool
choice for the analysis, and answering the research questions. For this purpose, we performed a
systematic literature review (SLR) combined with a bibliometric analysis (BA). Unsystematic
narrative literature reviews tend to be biased, and often lack rigor, while a systematic review, on the
other hand, uses a systematic method to summarize evidence on research questions with a detailed
and comprehensive plan of study (Tawfik et al, 2019; Phulwani et al, 2020). Combining a systematic
literature review with a bibliometric analysis enhances the contribution of the systematic literature
review by an objective assessment of scientific literature, by increasing the rigor, and by alleviating
researcher bias (Phulwani et al, 2020).

3.1. Material collection

We collected the data inputs of this research from the Scopus database, whose coverage is
almost 60% greater than that of Web of Science (WoS) (Zhao & Strotmann, 2015). Several previous
studies have compared different literature databases for literature reviews and bibliometric analysis
and showed the Scopus database covers different fields of science, technology, social sciences and
more (Fahimnia, 2015). The Scopus database is also more comprehensive compared to Web-of-
Science database which would include only ISI indexed journals, which in turns limits the number
of articles (Yong-Hak, 2013). Finally, Scopus provides comprehensive author and institution
profiles, in addition to exhaustive data related to each document, ensuring high accuracy and
completeness. All the articles and journals included in the study were written in English. Since
systematic literature reviews rely heavily on the judicious choice of keyword, we decided that the
following keywords had to be in the title, in the keywords, or in both: “supply chain” and “artificial
intelligence.” This ensured that the retrieved articles strongly correlated to the different elements of
AI and supply chain processes. To limit the number of papers selected for review, we excluded
conference contributions, articles published in trade journals, books, and book chapters from the
search process. We also based our selection on the ABS ranking by considering only ABS ranking
3 journals, since the third level comprises highly cited journals that publish original and well-
executed research papers that are research-oriented and meet high standards for scholarly rigour
which is compatible with the aim of our study to review the literature. It is also the most adopted
ranking in the research field (Skjølsvik, 2017). Avoiding ABS ranking 2 journals is due to the
orientation of the articles that are usually practitioner oriented. In addition, this category publishes
original research of only acceptable standard of quality. The same can be said about ABS level 1
ranking journals that publish research of a modest standard of quality and rigour. In March 2020,
the output of this literature search was a set of 136 papers published in the timespan of 1996-
2020.All the fields were selected during the process of filtering, because the aim of the study is to
explore the applications of AI in SC in all domains and sectors. Most of the articles selected for
review are obtained from the International Journal of Production Research (23%), Expert Systems
with Applications (19%), and the International Journal of Production Economics (15%). A detailed
journal-wise distribution of the 136 articles is listed in Appendix 1.

3.2. Tool and process

We used RStudio mapping software for the descriptive bibliometric analysis. The R
environment provides numerous packages related to bibliometrics. As presented in Section 3.1, we
performed the data collection by extracting research articles from the Scopus database. Aria and
Cuccurullo (2017) explained how bibliometric analyses can be performed using R. Aria and
Cuccurullo (2017) pointed out that R, which is an open-source software with numerous statistical
capabilities, is an ideal option for scientific computing. In our analysis, we followed a standard five-
stage science mapping workflow: study design, data collection, data analysis, data visualization, and
interpretation (Zupic & Cater, 2014).
All study designs involve defining research question(s) and selecting a suitable bibliometric
method to answer them. Three broad types of research questions can be answered using
bibliometrics: (i) the cognitive content and intellectual structure of a topic or field, (ii) the conceptual
structure of a topic or field, and (iii) social networks based on specific social factors (authors,
countries, etc.). In this paper, we answer the three research questions. Although bibliometric
methods usually reveal the structure of a field in a different way compared to what traditional
literature reviews reveal, they are not an alternative to reading research articles. Researchers with
in-depth knowledge of the field are well-positioned to better interpret the findings.
Data analysis and data visualization are often software-assisted and involve multiple substeps
(Aria & Cuccurullo, 2017) supported by the recommended science mapping workflow depicted in
Figure 2; this can be performed using the Bibliometrix package.

3.3. Approach
The topic “AI and supply chain” as a subject for review is abstract; therefore, analyzing
published work and extant literature as the main source of analysis seemed compelling (Jauch et al.,
1980). Given that the study aim is to review the existing literature related to AI and supply chains,
we performed a descriptive systematic literature review, as Mayring (2014) suggested. We adopted
a methodology featuring a three-step iterative approach: (i) material collection, (ii) descriptive
analysis, and (iv) material evaluation. We chose this method based on our research questions (Table
1). Similar to the review methodologies that Seuring and Müller (2008) and Gao et al. (2017)
adopted, we deduced the dimensions involved in our review process from the state-of-the-art supply
chain literature before analyzing the content from the selected papers.
 Records identified through Additional records identified
Identification

database searching through other sources

(n = 1478) (n = 10)

Records after duplicates removed

(n = 538)
Screening

Records screened Records excluded

(n = 502)
(Not employing AI)
(n = 36)

Full-text articles Full-text articles

assessed for eligibility excluded, with reasons
(n = 152)
Studies addressed in
Eligibility

the conference, book

chapter, book reviews
were excluded.
Only ABS Ranking 3
Journals other than
and above journals
English were excluded.
were considered for
review. (n = 22)

Studies included for

Included

the review
(n = 136)

Fig. 1. Material Collection Process

 Table 1
Methodological Table: Research Questions, Data Involved, Tools Applied, and Data Sources

Research Question Data Representation Tool for the Source

What are the general
research trends of AI
applications in
supply chains?
Analysis
Author keywords Co-occurrence network biblioNetwork() Scopus
Paper classification

Author Co-occurrence network biblioNetwork() Scopus

keywords, histNetwork()
abstracts, titles Historical direct citation histPlot()
What are the supply chain
network
outcomes that AI achieves?
Bibliographic
data frame Paper classification

What level of AI drives Author Co-occurrence network biblioNetwork() Scopus

such outcomes? keywords, Paper classification
abstracts, titles

We addressed RQ1 by analyzing author keyword co-occurrence networks. Author keywords

are the keywords the author(s) of a paper have specified. They reflect the scope of the study and the
dimensions the authors are focused on, namely, the topic, approach, and typology of the paper. In
contrast, indexed keywords are specified by academic search systems to categorize papers
coherently and accurately (Pozzi & Strozzi, 2018) based on vocabulary, antonyms, and synonyms
and taking into consideration diverse spellings, plurals, and term updates.
We approached RQ2 by analyzing a historiographic map, a type of graph that Garfield (2004)
proposed. It is meant to illustrate a chronological network map of highly significant direct citations
originating from a bibliographic set. We also answered the research question by classifying the
papers. We addressed RQ3 using author keyword co-occurrence networks.
 Fig. 2. Bibliometric and Recommended Science Mapping
Workflow
3.4. Review classification framework
We also performed a classification of the material collected according to four critical structural
dimensions: level of analytics, AI algorithms or techniques, sector or industry of application, and
supply chain processes (Appendix 2). The dimensions used for classifying the research papers could
be derived deductively or inductively, allowing traceability and inter-subject verifiability as
compared to other qualitative interpretive methods (Seuring and Gold, 2012). Before performing
the classification of the content material, we based our choice of dimensions on the existing
literature review and we selected the most representative dimensions with respect to our research
questions and the aim of our study to gain a descriptive insight into the literature.

3.4.1. Level of data analytics

We classified the papers into three analytic levels: descriptive, predictive, and prescriptive.
Descriptive analytics is performed to assess historical data and extract trends; it helps users to
identify problems and areas for improvement and is very useful for reporting using mathematics and
statistical tools and techniques. Predictive analytics helps users to predict future events or patterns
based on historical data by using different statistical and AI techniques. Prescriptive analytics
extends beyond the historical perception of descriptive analytics and the future outcomes of
predictive analytics to produce with recommendations through multi-criteria decision-making
(MCDM) techniques, simulation, and optimization (Riahi & Riahi, 2018).

3.4.2. AI algorithms or techniques

We exhaustively analyzed the papers to extract the AI algorithm or technique that each author
used to conduct their review or research. We extracted any algorithm or technique that was cited in
the article or used to solve a problem. We were careful to specify the exact algorithm or technique
in the classification, as referencing the category to which the algorithms belonged could be vague.
Identifying each algorithm or technique improved our understanding of how various supply chain
problems were approached in terms of the level of AI involved in solving the problem. This
information can be used to establish a correspondence between certain types of problems and the
algorithms that are best suited for their resolution.

3.4.3. Sector or industry of application

We classified the papers based on the sector or industry in which AI was used to address a
supply chain problem. This dimension reflects the fields in which AI for supply chains is gaining
rapid traction as well as those that still lack a clear perspective for AI adoption in their supply chain.
It also enabled us to detect which sectors remained far from adopting AI to transform their supply
chain, and thus, need more attention and research to assist them in moving toward and through this
revolutionary approach. This dimension can help companies to understand the importance and the
potential of AI to transform their supply chain.

3.4.4. Supply chain processes

Classifying the selected papers based on supply chain processes gave us insight into the
processes in which AI techniques are applied and into the supply chain management activities that
AI techniques support.
The classification based on this dimension also revealed the main sources of data that can be
collected and used to improve the different supply chain processes. With this classification, we
aimed to empirically represent AI’s contribution in supply chain processes to indicate research
activities that could be carried out in the future.
 To determine the supply chain processes to be considered, we used the supply chain operations
reference (SCOR) model, Version 11 as a reference framework. Unlike other models, the SCOR
model provides a unique framework that links business processes, metrics, best practices, and
technology features in a unified structure to support exchange among supply chain participants, and
consequently, to improve efficiency and to promote activities for improving supply chain
management. The processes defined in the SCOR model provide a set of predefined descriptions
for the activities that most companies perform to effectively run their supply chains.

4. Results and Analysis

We present the results of this study as a descriptive analysis consisting of the annual production
of articles, most frequent sources, most productive authors, most relevant sources, and top
manuscripts per citations. We also visualized various types of network mappings pertaining to word,
authorship, and citation, and we produced a historiographic diagram of the most powerful articles
from the past to the present. In addition, we present the conceptual structure of the field.

4.1. Descriptive analysis

4.1.1. Year-wise publication details
Figure 3 illustrates the number of published papers related to AI and supply chain. The trend in
the publications on AI and supply chain reflects increased focus on the topic since 2008. The
selected 136 papers (133 articles and 3 reviews) were published in 23 journals. A list of each
journal’s contribution is indexed in Appendix 1.

Articles

16 15 15 15
14
14
12 11 11
10
10 8
8 7 7

6 5 5
4
4 2 2
2 1 1 1 1 1

0
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Fig. 3. Year-Wise Distribution of Papers

4.1.2. Country co-authorship analysis
The country co-authorship analysis revealed a pattern of cooperation among authors from
different countries (see the network depicted in Figure 2—the nodes represent authors). The focal
country’s interaction with other countries is represented by the node size, which is proportional to
the total number of countries in which the focal country has worked. The links represent co-
authorships, and the link width represents the total number of collaborations between the focal
country and other countries. A network depicting the collaboration among authors can be obtained
by using the general formula:

Bcoll = A × A (1),

where A is a Document × Author matrix, element bij indicates how many collaborations exist
between authors i and j and the diagonal element bii is the number of documents authored or co-
authored by researcher i.

Fig. 4. Collaboration Network of Countries

The country-wise collaboration network between 1996 and 2020 is shown in Figure 4. The US
and the UK produced the highest number of papers in collaboration with many different countries.
Countries such as France, India, and China collaborated with many countries but produced
comparatively low numbers of papers. According to the betweenness centrality analysis, the US,
the UK, and France were the top countries linking the remaining countries in the collaboration
network (betweenness centrality measures the frequency with which a node is on the shortest path
between two other nodes).

4.1.3. Citation analysis of published articles

There are two main co-citation analyses categories (document co-citation analysis and author
co-citation analysis) that can be used to visualize the structure of an entire domain of study. For this
study, we used document co-citation analysis to explore the intellectual structure of AI and supply
chains. We created a historiographic map for the analysis. Garfield (2004) proposed the
historiographic map as a graph that sequentially represents the most significant direct citations from
a bibliographic set. Figure 5 depicts the chronological mapping of the most relevant citations from
the selected studies.
Co-citation analysis determines the occurrence of authors, references, or journals in a third
document; this analysis is based on the implication that co-cited articles might address the same
topic. The following general formula can be used to generate a co-citation network:

Bcocit = A × A (2),

where A is a Document × Cited reference matrix, element bij indicates how many co-citations exist
between documents i and j, and the main diagonal of Bcocit contains the number of documents where
a reference is cited in our data frame (diagonal element bii is the number of local citations of the
reference i).
The direction of the arrows in the historiographic map depicted in Figure 5 represents the
chronological change in research trends from the past. For example, Giannoccaro et al. (2002)
described an approach composed of three techniques: (i) Markov decision processes (MDP), and
(ii) an AI algorithm to solve MDPs (which is based on [iii] simulation modeling to manage inventory
decisions at all stages of the supply chain in an integrated manner). Kadadevaramath et al. (2012)
wrote about modeling and optimizing a three-echelon supply chain network using particle swarm
optimization AI algorithms. This promoted research dealing with green logistics and swarm
intelligence using different algorithms. As shown in Figure 5, starting from 1998, there was a
substantial growth in interest in the field. Swaminathan et al. (1998) laid the foundation for many
other studies about the historical citation network map. Our historical direct citation analysis
displays the existing linkages among various papers in the field of AI and supply chain by mapping
out the historical evolution of the field, thus helping scholars to identify the most important work
therein.
 Examining the number of citations reflects the quality of a document (Liao et al., 2018).
Swaminathan et al.’s (1998) paper ranked first owing to the number of citations (584), showing the
popularity and influence of this paper in the supply chain field. This work established a framework
that reduces the effort involved in modeling various supply chain reengineering alternatives and in
assessing their efficiency by means of simulations that consider a multitude of assumptions about
uncertainties regarding supply, demand, and process in a supply chain. The second most cited article
(298) was by Wolfert et al. (2017). The authors reviewed state-of-the-art uses of big data in smart
farming and identified the associated socio-economic concerns. The study reported that integrating
big data into smart farming not only enhanced production but also impacted food supply chain
integrity. Smart farming can benefit from AI and new technologies by introducing robots, enabling
the use of predictive insights, and making adequate operational decisions based on real-time data.

Fig. 5. Historical Direct Citation Network from the Historical

Network
4.1.4. Semantic network analysis
Semantic network analysis is defined as a method for analyzing the relationships between words
in individual texts. In this study, we examined the frequency distributions of words and the co-
occurrences of the keywords the authors used. We used co-word analysis to detect co-occurrences
of keywords or terms retrieved from the title, abstract, or body of a document. We then examined
the co-occurrence networks of the authors’ keywords, generated using the following formula:

Bcoc = A × A (3),
where A is a Document × Word matrix and Word is alternatively the authors’ keywords, keywords
plus, or the terms extracted from the titles or abstracts of the papers. Element bij indicates how many
co-occurrences exist between words i and j. The diagonal element bii is the number of documents
containing the word i.

Fig. 6. Co-Occurrence Network Based on Authors’ Keywords

We divided the 50 most frequently occurring keywords into four clusters (Figure 6). The radius
of the circle shows the frequency of the words, and the color reflects a specific cluster. The largest
cluster is in purple and consists of 14 keywords. The highest value of betweenness in the purple
cluster is related to the enable process (according to the SCOR model) (166,871). The keywords
pertaining to AI in the other clusters include “artificial intelligence” (86,110), “artificial neural
networks” (3,085), and “machine learning” (27,062). In short, this means that many supply chain
studies deal with AI.

4.1.5. Authors’ productivity

In terms of author performance, K. L. Choy (h-index: 6, g-index: 8) published the highest
number of studies. Choy, the most productive author, published an initial paper in 2002 and
published eight papers between 2002 and 2018. Although A. De Meyer published only four papers
between 2015 and 2018, this author is one of the 10 most productive authors in the revies. H. C. W.
Lau has not published anything since 2011. From these results, we deduced a strong positive
correlation between the number of citations and author productivity. The 10 most productive authors
did not publish any papers in 2020, and only two of these authors published in 2019. Figure 7 shows
the authors’ productivity over time based on the number of papers and the annual total citations.

Fig. 7. Top Authors’ Productivity Over Time

4.2. Conceptual structure of the field

Author’s keywords co-occurrence analysis reflets clusters of keywords. They are considered as
themes, whose density and centrality can be used in classifying themes and mapping in a two-
dimensional diagram called a thematic map. The keywords are distributed in four quadrants which
reflects the maturity level of the theme.

Fig. 8. Thematic Map

The upper-right quadrant is composed of motor-themes which are characterized by both high
centrality and density. This means that these themes are developed and important for the research
field. The lower-right quadrant refers to the basic and transversal. They are characterized by high
centrality and low density. These themes are important for a research field and refers to general
topics transversal to the different research areas of the field. The lower-left quadrant is composed
of emerging or disappearing themes. They have both low centrality and density meaning that are
weakly developed and marginal. The upper-left quadrant contains very specialized or niche themes.
They have well developed internal links (high density) but unimportant external links and so are of
only limited importance for the field (low centrality) (Corte et al, 2019).
Since the field of AI in SC is gaining more attention over the years, which is justified in Figure3,
the themes related to the field are still relatively new or under development. It is until 2006 that this
field have known an increase in term of research. In addition, with the increasing VUCA (Volatility,
uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity) aspect of the environment in which the supply chain
operates nowadays, especially during crisis like the coronavirus pandemic in 2020, SCs requires
developed technologies such as AI allowing prediction, forecasting, assistance in decision-making
and assistance in the various processes of the SC. Consequently, AI adoption in SC is far from being
a mature field as it is still being researched and built. For this reason, we can notice that the upper
right quadrant in the thematic map is empty.
The upper-left quadrant is composed of a theme related to inventory management through the
principles of systems dynamics. As this quadrant refers to a very specialized niche, the AI technique
is easily identifiable, which is ANN in this case. This theme is very related to the field of AI for SC,
however, is of only limited importance for the field. Again, since the field of AI & SC is still
relatively new, the pertaining themes are still under development and profound research, which
justifies the emptiness of the lower-left quadrant. However, we can notice that the theme of logistics,
and more precisely facility location and coordination can be considered a basic theme and an
emerging theme. The probability of this theme going towards disappearance because of the growing
interest in this theme as it is justified by the paper’s classification in the Appendix. The lower right
quadrant constitutes basic themes, in our analysis it is about supply chain management and
optimization, which is a transversal theme related to all the areas of the AI & SC. This theme pertains
to the enable process, for which the full potential of AI can be invested to manage and organize all
the activities of the SC.
5. Classification Results
We adopted four critical structural dimensions to organize the classification framework for our
research and answer the research questions: level of analytics, types of AI algorithms used in the
supply chain field, applications of AI across the different sectors and industries, and AI use across
supply chain processes. The classification results are presented in Appendix 2.

5.1. Data-driven supply chain

A large volume of data is constantly generated due to the growing use of smart equipment,
sensors, and IoT in supply chains. Various technologies such as IoT and cloud computing are driving
traditional supply chains to become smart supply chains. The data generated are usually too large
and complex to be processed using conventional data-processing techniques. To take advantage of
this important asset, new big data analytical techniques are required to extract the knowledge that
can increase supply chain efficiency (Hashem et al., 2014). We reviewed all the selected papers
based on the level of analytics: descriptive, prescriptive, and predictive. We found that the majority
of the articles used descriptive analytics (57%; 77 out of 136 papers) followed by prescriptive
analytics (39%; 53 out of 136 papers). A very small number of studies used predictive analytics
(4%; 6 out of 136 papers).

Predictive
analytics
4%

Prescriptive
analytics
39%

Descriptive
analytics
57%

Fig. 9. Level of analytics distribution

5.1.1. Descriptive analytics

A large number of papers selected for the review used descriptive analytics (77 out of 136
papers) to analyze the correlation between AI and supply chains. They used descriptive analytics to
examine the use of new technologies and AI to enhance agriculture supply chain performance
(Lezoche et al., 2020). This type of analytics was also used to investigate the impact of AI adoption
on waste reduction and quality improvement (Fröhling et al., 2010; Georgiadis & Athanasiou, 2013;
Zhou & Piramuthu, 2013). Many studies that demonstrated the benefit of emerging technologies
such as RFID (Radio Frequency Identification) (Werthmann et al., 2017; Zhou & Piramuthu, 2013)
to transform supply chains used descriptive analytics.

5.1.2. Prescriptive analytics

Thirty-nine percent of the selected papers used prescriptive analytics. Most used multi-criteria
decision-making (MCDM) techniques to design decision support systems for supplier selection
(Scott et al., 2015). A combination of MCDM and the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) was also
used for the same objective (Dweiri et al., 2016). Data envelopment analysis (DEA) was used in
research on reducing greenhouse gas emissions in closed-loop supply chains (CLSC) (Neto et al.,
2010).

5.1.3. Predictive analytics

Only six of the 136 selected papers used predictive analytics. Its application covered the
prediction of adopting interorganizational systems (IOS) for a well-integrated and collaborative
supply chain network (Chong & Bai, 2014) and for developing predictive early warning and
proactive control systems in food supply chain networks to reduce performance deviations (Li et
al., 2010). Finally, it was applied in a predictive decision support system to manage the supply chain
of packaged fresh and highly perishable products through sales forecasting (Dellino et al., 2018).

5.2. AI-driven supply chain

With reference to the classification of the selected papers based on the AI algorithm or
technique used, 9% of the papers compared different AI algorithms. The most used technique was
genetic algorithms (14 papers)—these decreased both the bullwhip effect (BWE) and the cash flow
bullwhip (CF-BWE) across supply chains (Badakhshan et al., 2020). Genetic algorithms were also
used for risk assessment in food supply chains (Chang et al., 2017). The second most used technique
was artificial neural networks (ANNs) (5 papers) as a tool for enhancing logistics workflow
responsiveness (Lee at al., 2011). One study proposed a comparative forecasting methodology for
uncertain customer demands in a multi-level supply chain structure via neural techniques (Efendigil
et al., 2009). Many AI techniques were used, which justifies the fact that even if we could identify
the most used techniques, the number of articles using them remains limited. Almost every paper
used a new AI technique, such as decision trees, intelligent agents, bio-inspired algorithms, and
particle swarm intelligence. It is important to note that many papers did not explicitly use AI;
however, they reviewed a set of algorithms or initiated its use in the respective field of the study.
5.3. Sector or industry of AI application in supply chains
AI’s emergence in the supply chain context has caused radical change in the organization of
work processes. Any sector can benefit from the right integration of AI in its processes and become
a more proactive, predictive, automated, and personalized sector. Our review highlights that AI has
been used in diverse sectors—food (Di Giacomo & Patrizi, 2010; Li et al., 2010), retail (Salmi &
Holmström, 2004; Van Aart et al., 2004), automotive (Kellner et al., 2019; Werthmann et al., 2017),
and manufacturing (Kristianto et al., 2017; Kumar et al., 2017) represent the four major sectors that
integrated AI into supply chains. AI was also used in supply chains pertaining to healthcare
(Ghandforoush & Sen, 2010; Nabelsi & Gagnon, 2017), oil (Kallestrup et al., 2014; Repoussis et
al., 2009; Yu et al., 2019), remanufacturing (Fröhling et al., 2010; Georgiadis & Athanasiou, 2013;
Zhou & Piramuthu, 2013), and several other sectors such as agriculture, bioenergy, green supply
chain, and aerospace.
It is important to note that the majority of the papers considered a simulation-based approach
(26%; 35 out of 136), which does not account for any specific sector and focuses on an application
in a real case study.

5.4. Supply chain processes

Our analysis of the distribution of the selected papers based on the different supply chain
processes (SCOR areas) revealed that the enable process received higher attention from researchers
(41%; 55 out of 136 papers); this was followed by the plan process (31%; 42 out of 136 papers) and
the deliver process (15%; 21 out of 136 papers). The source process (11%; 15 out of 136 papers),
the make process (5%; 7 out of 136 papers), and the return process (2%; 3 out of 136 papers)
received very little research attention. No paper studied all six processes simultaneously. The sum
of the papers that studied each process was greater than the total number of selected papers because
some papers considered more than one process in their research.

Make Return
5% 2%
Source
10%

Enable
Deliver 39%
14%

Plan
30%

Fig. 10. Supply chain processes distribution

5.4.1. Level of data analytics and SCOR processes
To gain deeper insight into the type of analytics used to process the collected data, we analyzed
the papers according to the level of data analytics that was used in the different supply chain
processes, also referred to as the SCOR areas. The results are presented in Table 2.

Table 2
Level of Analytics Across SC Processes
Supply Chain Level of Analytics
Processes Descriptive Prescriptive Predictive
Plan 21 18 3
Source 7 8 0
Make 5 2 0
Deliver 11 10 0
Return 2 1 0
Enable 31 21 3

Table 2 reveals that the plan process received significant focus in the literature (42 papers).
Twenty-one papers in this area used descriptive analytics through reviews and empirical studies. Of
the remaining papers in the plan process, 18 papers used prescriptive analytics, and only three papers
used predictive analytics. Of the 15 papers in the source process, eight papers used prescriptive
analytics, whereas seven papers used descriptive analytics. In the make process, five papers used
descriptive analytics, and two papers used prescriptive analytics. Descriptive analytics and
prescriptive analytics were almost equally used in the deliver process, with 11 and 10 papers,
respectively. Of the three papers focusing on the return process, two papers deployed descriptive
analytics, and one paper used prescriptive analytics. In the enable process, which was the most
studied supply chain area in the literature (41%), descriptive analytics was used in 31 papers,
prescriptive analytics was used in 21 papers, and predictive analytics was used in three papers.
It is important to emphasize that the use of predictive analytics in the literature was very limited
(2%) and distributed across the plan process (Dellino et al., 2019; Nikolopoulos et al., 2016; Yu et
al., 2019) and the enable process (Chong & Bai, 2014; Li et al., 2010; Rodger, 2014). This might be
due to the nature of the two processes, which are focused on ensuring a balance between supply and
demand, making predictive analytics the best option for predicting demand and managing the supply
chain through business rules and supply chain network management. Thus, predictive analytics is
the best fit because prediction enables the supply chain to be more proactive, improves operational
productivity, and fosters strategic decision-making.
The findings from Table 3 indicate that descriptive and prescriptive analytics were the most
used techniques for analyzing the different issues within the supply chain and the likelihood of AI
adoption to solve different problems and to increase performance.

5.4.2. AI techniques and SCOR processes

We analyzed the distribution of the different AI techniques used across the various SCOR areas
in order to gain insights into which AI techniques or algorithms were used across different supply
chain processes.
Genetic algorithms were the most used type of algorithm in the plan process (6 papers),
followed by ANNs (4 papers). Many other techniques were evenly distributed across the selected
papers. Studies addressing issues related to the source area mainly focused on reviewing different
AI techniques. The same trend can be noticed in the research dealing with the make process. Genetic
algorithms and particle swarm optimization were the predominant AI techniques used in papers
related to the deliver process. We deployed a decision tree to discuss topics pertaining to the return
process. In the enable area, authors relied on the review of different AI techniques (four papers); the
most used technique was genetic algorithms (five papers), followed by neural networks and particle
swarm intelligence. Although many papers did not use any AI techniques in their study, they formed
part of our review because they initiated the use of AI in the different listed sectors.
Genetic algorithms received significant attention in the literature due to their potential to solve
optimization problems; this is because they have few mathematical requirements and can handle
any kind of objective function and constraint (Xu & Can, 2011). This explains their wide use in the
plan, deliver, and enable processes—these processes are best positioned to use optimization. The
second most used technique was ANN, which was mostly used in the plan and enable processes.
Neural networks are a family of statistical learning models inspired by biological neural networks
that are used to estimate or approximate functions that might depend on a large number of inputs,
such as demand data in the plan process and the data generated by the partners in the enable process.
Most of the articles that used ANNs also used the technique for planning.
Table 3
AI Techniques Across SC Processes
AI Technique Plan Source Make Deliver Return Enable
None 17 11 5 11 2 32
Adaptive tabu search (ATS) 1
algorithm
AI algorithm review 2 3 1 1 4
ANN 4 3
Artificial immune system 1
Artificial
algorithmWD 1
Association rule mining 1
Bioinspired algorithms 1
C4.5 algorithm 1
Clustering 1
Data mining algorithm 1
Decision tree 2 1 1 1 1 1
Dimensionality reduction 1
Genetic algorithm 6 3 5
Gradient descent algorithm 1
Intelligent agent 1
Intelligent optimization 1
algorithms
Kalman filter 1
Multi-objective artificial bee 1
Nearest
colony neighbor 1 1
Particle swarm intelligence 1 1 2
Particle swarm optimization 2
Regression trees 1 1
SMART algorithm 1 1
Support vector machine 1

6. Discussion
6.1. Discussion of the findings
This study is the first attempt to explore the research work from 1996 to 2020 related to AI
applications in SC from a descriptive point of view—we used a systematic literature review
combined with bibliometric analysis for this exploration. This work also presents a granular
classification of the papers. Combined, these elements were sufficient to answer our research
questions.
6.1.1. RQ1: What are the general research trends of AI applications in supply chains?
Based on the extant literature and the analysis of the output, we find that AI-related research
has increased over the years. The present findings are restricted to the supply chain field due to the
intention of this analysis to explore the correlation between AI and supply chain using related
keywords. Our analysis of authors’ keyword co-occurrence network revealed the association of AI
with different sub-domains of supply chains, namely demand forecasting, supplier selection, supply
chain network design, supply chain risk management, inventory management, sustainability,
logistics, supply chain process management, and supply chain integration. The common element
between these supply chain sub-fields, is their requirement of a decision-making process which
justifies the association of these subfields to the different AI algorithms. Artificial Intelligence
techniques are growingly enhancing and enriching decision support through data analysis, data
trends detection, forecasting and anticipation.
From a process perspective, the enable process gained more attention by researchers when
considering the use of AI, than the other processes. The enable process includes processes associated
with supply chain management such as business rules, data resources, contracts, compliance and
risk management. This finding is in full agreement with the previous one, and confirms that the
management and decision making related activities in SC, consider the implementation of the
different AI techniques and algorithms and are trending in the research works due to the increasingly
growing decision support potential of AI and the awareness that the success of the supply chain
requires more and more attention to the management and consideration of the different parties
involved in a supply chain, but also to the benefits of an integrated, sustainable and adaptable supply
chain. The diversity of the AI techniques, provides the decision-makers with a wide selection to
choose from taking into consideration the SC process, the data required and the aimed outputs.

6.1.2. RQ2: What are the supply chain outcomes that AI achieves?
AI for demand forecasting. AI and machine learning can be applied to improve demand
forecasting. This is one of the most promising applications of AI for supply chains. The exceptional
performance of AI for demand forecasting translates into tangible benefits across the supply chain,
starting with improved supplies which lead to fewer product shortages, fewer overstocks and fewer
waste (especially for food products). Planning is also improved, making it possible to optimize
storage capacities or even reception / dispatch. AI methods offer a lot for time series forecasting,
thanks to their potential of extracting models from input data over long periods of time, thus they
havec v perfect applicability in demand forecasting.
Table 4
AI for demand forecasting references

Algorithm Key Contributions Author(s)

Realized a daily demand predicting system Slimani et al. (2017)
in a supermarket using MLP by adding
ANN
inputs that included previous demand,
days’ classification, and average demand
quantities
ANN Developed a forecasting model for Bala (2012)
retailers based on customer segmentation
to improve performance of inventory

SVM Investigated the applicability and benefits Carbonneau et al. (2007)

of
ML techniques in forecasting distorted
demand signals with high noise in supply
chains

AI for risk management and resilience. SCRM is a suitable field of application for AI due to its
resilient strategies that commonly rely on fast decision-making based on potentially large,
multidimensional data sources. AI is a very promising technology for the optimization of the supply
chain and building its resilience. Indeed, it makes it possible to process and correlate a large number
of data, to facilitate understanding and to anticipate the impacts of external events.
Table 5
AI for risk management and resilience references

Algorithm Key Contributions Author(s)

Used a decision support model Rajesh (2020)
incorporating an amalgamation of grey
ANN/SVM
theory and layered analytic network
process (ANP) to quantify various resilient
strategies for risk mitigation

ANN Developed a forecasting model for retailers Bala (2012)

based on customer segmentation to
improve inventory performance

Decision tree Proposed a two-stage decision support Mogre et al. (2016)

system (DSS) that would assist managers in
selecting mitigation strategies for supply
chain risks and mitigation tactics when
risks occurred
 AI for transportation. The structure of distribution systems can increase the transportation costs
and reduce the ability to efficiently meet customers’ demands. AI-based models provide near-
optimal solutions for a broad range of routing problems, thus ensuring on-time deliveries, optimizes
the transport of goods in the warehouse; whether it is performed by robots, automated storage
solutions, or operators assisted by handling equipment. AI can make use of real-time traffic data,
robotics, computer-vision and autonomous vehicles, all of which can help build specific models to
improve transportations.
Table 6
AI for transportation references

Algorithm Key Contributions Author(s)

Proposed a novel technique for modeling Mokhtarinejad et al. (2015)
and solving location, routing, and
Genetic algorithm
scheduling problems via cross-docking in
the supply chain

AI for supplier selection. Supplier evaluation and selection constitute a critical and complex multi-
criteria decision-making procedure that directly affects the supply chain. One of the methods for
assisting a company’s supplier selection process is AI, where machines can be trained by decision-
makers or by using historical data to make predictions and recommendations. Artificial intelligence-
based models like ANN have been used extensively to solve supplier selection due to its ability to
deal with multiple constraints (quality, delivery, performance history, production capability, service,
engineering and technical capability, business structure, price, integrity, warranties, honesty,
reliability, reputation, commitment and financial position) which must be satisfied simultaneously,
can predict new outcomes on past trends, and can process information at high speed.
Table 7
AI for supplier selection references

Algorithm Key Contributions Author(s)

Proposed a new intelligent model to Vahdani et al. (2012)
predict the performance rating of suppliers
ANN
in the cosmetics industry
Genetic algorithm Presented a new intelligent model using a Fallahpour et al. (2017)
genetic algorithm to solve the suppliers’
performance evaluation and prioritization
problems
 ANN Described a framework using fuzzy logic Lau et al. (2002)
and neural networks for handling supplier
selection

AI for inventory management. Inventory is a primary source of cost and has a considerable
influence on responsiveness. It increases the number of demands that can be met by ensuring product
availability and readiness at the right time. One of the most effective ways inventory management
can benefit from AI is by the automation of the process. For instance, an artificial intelligent system
would be able to track sales automatically, thus stores data for monitoring the inventory in real-time,
avoiding overstocking or understocking. AI algorithms can also generate reports automatically
regarding the change in demand, hence saving the time that could be spent on estimating the stock.
Artificial Neural Networks modeling is the most used technique in inventory management thanks
to its capability of handling data with high volatility more accurately. ANN thus overcomes the
shortcomings of traditional forecasting models.
Table 8
AI for inventory management references

Algorithm Key Contributions Author(s)

Explored the feasibility and relevance of Çimen and Kirkbride (2016)
ANN ADP algorithms to optimize inventory
decisions
Genetic algorithm Provided empirical evidence that Borade and Sweeney (2014)
significant economic benefits can be
achieved by using a genetic algorithm-
based (GA-based) decision support system
(DSS) in a vendor-managed inventory
(VMI) supply chain

6.1.3. RQ3: What level of AI drives such outcomes?

Before determining the AI level that drives the previously reported outcomes, it is essential to
define the three different AI levels. The first level is artificial narrow intelligence (ANI), also
referred to as “weak AI” or “narrow AI.” ANI is goal-oriented and is designed to perform singular
tasks. The second level is artificial general intelligence (AGI), also referred to as “strong AI” or
“deep AI.” This describes a machine’s ability to completely and successfully perform tasks like a
human being. Currently, AGI does not exist. The third level is artificial super intelligence (ASI). To
be categorized as ASI, an AI needs to outperform human capabilities which does not exist yet. From
this brief introduction to the three different levels of AI, the outcomes stated in response to RQ2 are
driven by the first level of AI.
After determining the level of AI that drives such outcomes, we further explored our results
from an AI classification point of view (Figure 11). Following the literature review, we conducted
an in-depth reading of the papers, finding that most of them concentrated on the use of machine
learning—specifically, reinforcement learning using ANNs. For example, Ponte et al. (2015)
proposed the application of AI techniques to reduce the bullwhip effect using a forecasting system
based on ANNs. Moraga et al. (2011) used ANNs to recognize behavioral patterns and to predict
future performance accordingly. Machine learning is used for analyses because it can analyze a
superior amount of information and come up with structured results. Machine learning increases the
cost-effectiveness of the whole process while unlocking knowledge that was unobtainable using
earlier technologies.

Fig. 11. Artificial Intelligence classification

 7. AI-driven SC framework

Fig. 12. AI-driven SC framework

With reference to the review findings, we report that AI has significant potential for applications
across different SC processes. The findings indicate that the SC can be transformed when AI is
adopted. Yet, it is important to remind that a successful adoption of AI within the SC requires a set
of conditions which we refer to as success factors for AI adoption. This success is also dependent
on the selection of the most adapted AI algorithms (Bashir et al, 2020). Based on the findings, the
proposed framework has three key elements: Success factors for AI adoption, AI techniques, and
AI-driven SC operations. Through this framework we aim to guide practitioners towards a
successful adoption of AI techniques within the SC, and provide researchers with a foundation for
further research regarding the factors that contribute to the success of AI adoption within the SC
and the factors that should be considered for the selection of the AI algorithm to use.

7.1. Success factors for AI adoption

In a world of data abundance, businesses are looking to gain a competitive advantage through the
use of this important asset. With the availability of large amounts of data, Artificial intelligence (AI)
is being adopted in a wide range of operational settings, but many organizations are still at an early
stage of adoption or fail to implement AI the right way (Mir et al, 2020). The correct implementation
of AI can produce huge positive results and can transform the SC. Before considering the adoption
of AI, SC managers should consider many factors, which we refer to as “Success factors for AI
adoption”. Three broad factors should be considered, namely the data, knowledge of AI field, and
SC capabilities to adopt AI. The availability of data is very important in any AI project. All AI
algorithms require large dataset, especially for learning. Real-time data is also important for
decision-making oriented AI projects as an AI algorithm requires real-time data to process in order
to generate real-time outputs. The external data is required when the organization is using AI in a
large scope and includes or invites the stakeholders in the transformation of its SC. When it comes
to knowledge of AI field, certain AI techniques, such as scorecards and decision trees, are easy to
understand. But neural networks are more complex and mysterious. AI should be transparent in
terms of inputs, processes, and decisions. Organizations needs to understand at least briefly, the
functioning of an algorithm and how the decision was made. Thus, the users will be able to
manipulate the algorithm so they can view, approve, and override the decisions. This is what we
called “the black box effect” in our framework. Users should also acquire some deep knowledge in
AI, to manipulate the algorithms to fit their needs. When it comes to the SC capabilities, and from
the review of the literature , we conclude that one of the most important capabilities that a SC should
develop is the adaptability, which is the ability to adjust a supply chain's design to meet structural
shifts the markets and modify supply network in strategies and technologies (Lee, 2004). Thus, the
SC will be able to flow with the AI adoption requirements and the changes it will bring along. Also,
the SC should develop its capability of learning, since the adoption of AI without perspectives and
ability to learn from it, the identification of what works and what does not, will make no sense and
won’t bring any positive changes to the SC.

7.2. AI techniques
The second element in the framework consists of the AI techniques that are used in the different
SC processes. The literature review revealed that AI is adopted for transforming the SC and
improving its performance. Yet, of the large number of available AI techniques and algorithms, only
a few are explored and exploited in SC processes. In the framework, we adopted a classification of
AI to present its richness and the unexplored algorithms for SC applications. Yet, the matching
between the SC processes and the AI techniques is deduced from the performed systematic literature
review. Therefore, studies should be conducted to profoundly identify the factors that should be
considered when selecting the AI techniques to use in each SC process.

7.3. AI-driven SC operations

The review findings reveal that AI adoption by SCs not only increases performance, lowers costs,
and reduces losses, but also brings about complete changes to the SC, making it adaptable, agile,
and resilient. Each SC process can inevitably benefit from the potential of AI. In our framework we
grouped these benefits onto four categories: analysis, modelling, control, and learning.
AI is very powerful at finding insights and patterns in large datasets that humans just can't see, thus
can generate deep and complete analysis regarding different SC operations, for instance
performance analysis, resilience analysis or demand forecasting. The second category is modelling
in which AI can be used to train a model in order to recognize certain types of patterns. It can be
used to solve routing problems for example and usually leads to an optimization. The third category
is control in which AI can exploit real-time data for decision-making, thus controlling the different
SC critical operations like risk control and inventory control. Finally, there is learning. In the supply
chain, AI aims above all to improve operational performance, by automating certain processes such
as demand forecasting or production planning. The advantage is to be able, thanks to its analytical
capacity, to correlate very quickly large volumes of data. AI adoption with the aim to learn from
data or from past event will make it possible to carry out much finer projections and analyzes
situations despite an increasingly unstable economic environment and more volatile
demand.Machine learning in particular allows organizations to discover new patterns in the data,
thus assist in decision-making, adaptability, more resilience and a more developed SC maturity.
It is very important for organizations to position themselves in terms of objectives or goals they aim
to achieve when considering the adoption of AI in their SCs as it will help structure the required
data, build a strategy for AI adoption and select the adequate AI techniques.

8. Implications of the study

8.1. Theoretical implications
Based on the findings and the its discussions, we present the following broad areas as needing further
investigations from researchers.
From a close reading of the papers reviewed in this study, we conclude that simulation data are
the main data source for the studies, caused by the difficulty of acquiring historical data related to
the supply chain. Researchers should consider basing their studies on data generated by the different
supply chain structures.
With real supply chain data, future researchers could suggest which AI methods can be applied
best to certain supply chain tasks—currently, many researchers try different AI algorithms for
problem-solving and then compare the results of each algorithm to decide which one performs better
for the problem under consideration. In addition, the findings of this study shed light on a wider
range of less-popular AI techniques that might become more influential in future research.

8.2. Practical implications

Future researchers should also examine data-processing approaches related to the application of AI
for an enhanced operations management in different sectors and industries. Prediction and supplier
selection are frequently addressed by using AI—this is mainly because manually made decisions
might involve mistakes. Decision-making is not a process that is exclusive to supplier selection—
this process is present in every supply chain task; thus, other supply chain fields should be explored,
and decision support tools must be improved. Future studies should evaluate the impact of AI
adoption on the human workforce. Identifying how AI integration could impact the human
workforce is crucial for maintaining the right equilibrium among all the components in a supply
chain. Future studies may also compare the performance of different AI algorithms and techniques,
to assist practitioners in the selection of the AI algorithms to opt for according to the need of their
supply chain process. Finally, researchers should develop a framework which reflects the
transformational potential of AI in the field of supply chain. A framework could be very beneficial
to practitioners, as it would help the supply chain parties assess their state of SC maturity, identify
the aspects requiring enhancement and decide the strategy to follow to achieve a positive
transformation of the SC.
9. Limitations
Our study has several limitations that we outline here. While we conducted a literature review
using the Scopus database to retrieve the relevant material related to the topic, it is possible that we
may have missed papers during the selection process because of keywords choice for example. In
addition, the analysis is based on our interpretation and thus dependent upon our perceptions and
classifications of the collected material.

10. Conclusion
This study was based on a systematic literature review combined with bibliometric analysis to
investigate the current state of research on AI applications in the supply chain. We performed this
review using 136 research articles from the Scopus database published between 1996 and 2020. We
found that among the three machine-learning algorithms (supervised, unsupervised, and
reinforcement learning), there was a focus on reinforcement learning in the supply chain. We
examined the “how” and “what” of the extant research on AI applied to supply chains with an in-
depth exploration of collaborations and theoretical bases of research. This study contributes to the
body of knowledge through the analysis of the evolution of AI applications in the supply chain and
the identification of research trends. The results of the analysis revealed that the number of
publications is increasing, and that more attention must be paid to AI applications in supply chains.
Descriptive analysis showed a gradual increase in the number of publications related to AI since
2010; this increase also applies to work in supply chain and supply chain management. Thus, AI is
used increasingly in supply chains as a new solution to both traditional and novel problems. The
main contribution of this study is the classification of the research articles in order to assimilate the
current state of literature in this field and to understand the role of AI in supply chains, in addition
to the development of a AI-driven SC framework, which can help academics and practitioners to
understand the factors that should be considered before the adoption of AI and the importance of
envisioning and setting the expected outputs of AI adoption in a SC. The framework constitutes a
foundation for further research in this direction.
 References
Aria, M., Cuccurullo, C. (2017). Bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping
analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 11(4), 959–975.
Badakhshan, E., Humphreys, P., Maguire, L., McIvor, R. (2020). Using simulation-based system
dynamics and genetic algorithms to reduce the cash flow bullwhip in the supply chain.
International Journal of Production Research.
Bala, P. K. (2012). Improving inventory performance with clustering-based demand
forecasts. Journal of Modelling in Management, 7(1), 23–37.
Bashir, M. U., Swapnil, S., Kumar, K. A., & Prasad, G. M. (2020). Critical success factors for
integrating artificial intelligence and robotics. Digital Policy, Regulation and Governance,
22, 307–331.
Borade, A. B., & Sweeney, E. (2014). Decision support system for vendor managed inventory
supply chain: A case study. International Journal of Production Research, 53(16), 4789–
4818.
Borges, A. F. S., Laurindo, F. J. B., Spínola, M. M., Gonçalves, R. F., & Mattos, C. A. (2020). The
strategic use of artificial intelligence in the digital era: Systematic literature review and
future research directions. International Journal of Information Management, 102-225.
Cao, M., & Zhang, Q. (2011). Supply chain collaboration: Impact on collaborative advantage and
firm performance. Journal of Operations Management, 29, 163–180.
Carbonneau, R., Vahidov, R., & Laframboise, K. (2007). Machine learning-based demand
forecasting in supply chains. International Journal of Intelligent Information
Technologies, 3(4), 40–57.
Chang, Y., Erera, A. L., & White, C. (2017). Risk assessment of deliberate contamination of food
production facilities. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems, 47(3),
381–393.
Chong, A. Y. -L., & Bai, R. (2014). Predicting open iOS adoption in SMEs: An integrated SEM-
neural network approach. Expert Systems with Applications, 41(1), 221–229.
Çimen, M., & Kirkbride, C. (2016). Approximate dynamic programming algorithms for
multidimensional flexible production-inventory problems. International Journal of
Production Research, 55(7), 2034–2050.
Collin, J., Eloranta, E., & Holmström, J. (2009). How to design the right supply chains for your
customers. Supply Chain Management, 14, 411–417.
Čerka, P., Grigienė, J., & Sirbikytė, G. (2015). Liability for damages caused by artificial
intelligence. Computer Law & Security Review, 31, 376–389.
Corte, V., Del Gaudio, G., Sepe, F., & Sciarelli, F. (2019). Sustainable Tourism in the Open
Innovation Realm: A Bibliometric Analysis. Sustainability, 11, 6114.
Dellino, G., Laudadio, T., Mari, R., Mastronardi, N., & Meloni, C. (2018). A reliable decision
support system for fresh food supply chain management. International Journal of
Production Research, 56(4), 1458–1485.
Di Giacomo, L., & Patrizi, G. (2010). Methodological analysis of supply chains management
applications. European Journal of Operational Research, 207(1), 249–257.
Dweiri, F., Kumar, S., Khan, S. A., & Jain, V. (2016). Designing an integrated AHP based decision
support system for supplier selection in automotive industry. Expert Systems with
Applications, 62, 273–283.
Efendigil, T., Önüt, S., & Kahraman, C. (2009). A decision support system for demand forecasting
with artificial neural networks and neuro-fuzzy models: A comparative analysis. Expert
Systems with Applications, 36(3 Part 2), 6697–6707.
Fahimnia, B., Sarkis, J., & Davarzani, H. (2015). Green supply chain management: A review and
bibliometric analysis. International Journal of Production Economics, 162, 101–114.
Fallahpour, A., Wong, K. Y., Olugu, E. U., & Musa, S. N. (2017). A predictive integrated genetic-
based model for supplier evaluation and selection. International Journal of Fuzzy
Systems, 19(4), 1041–1057.
Fröhling, M., Schwaderer, F., Bartusch, H., & Rentz, O. (2010). Integrated planning of
transportation and recycling for multiple plants based on process simulation. European Journal
of Operational Research, 207, 958–970.
Gao, D., Xu, Z., Ruan, Y. Z., & Lu, H. (2017). From a systematic literature review to integrated
definition for sustainable supply chain innovation (SSCI). Journal of Cleaner
Production, 142, 1518–1538.
Garfield, E. (2004). Historiographic mapping of knowledge domains literature. Journal of
Information Science, 30(2), 119–145.
Georgiadis, P., & Athanasiou, E. (2013). Flexible long-term capacity planning in closed-loop supply
chains with remanufacturing. European Journal of Operational Research, 225(1), 44–58.
Ghandforoush, P., & Sen, T. K. (2010). A DSS to manage platelet production supply chain for
regional blood centers. Decision Support Systems, 50(1), 32–42.

Giannakis, M., & Papadopoulos, T. (2016). Supply chain sustainability: A risk management
approach. International Journal of Production Economics, 171, 455–470.
Giannoccaro, I., & Pontrandolfo, P. (2002). Inventory management in supply chains: A
reinforcement learning approach. International Journal of Production Economics, 78, 153–
161.
Hashem, I., Yaqoob, I., Anuar, N., Mokhtar, S., Gani, A., & Khan, S. (2014). The rise of “big data”
on cloud computing: Review and open research issues. Information Systems, 47, 98–115.
Hasuike, T., & Mehlawat, M. K. (2017). Investor-friendly and robust portfolio selection model
integrating forecasts for financial tendency and risk-averse. Annals of Operations
Research, 269(1–2), 205–221.
Jauch, L. R., Osborn, R. N., & Martin, T. N. (1980). Structured content analysis of cases: A
complementary method for organizational research. The Academy of Management
Review, 5(4), 517.
Kadadevaramath, R. S., Chen, J. C. H., Latha Shankar, B., & Rameshkumar, K. (2012). Application
of particle swarm intelligence algorithms in supply chain network architecture optimization.
Expert Systems with Applications., 39, 10160–10176.
Kallestrup, K. B., Lynge, L. H., Akkerman, R., & Oddsdottir, T. A. (2014). Decision support in
hierarchical planning systems: The case of procurement planning in oil refining industries.
Decision Support Systems, 68, 49–63.
Kellner, F., Lienland, B., & Utz, S. (2019). An a posteriori decision support methodology for solving
the multi-criteria supplier selection problem. European Journal of Operational Research,
272, 505–522.
Kristianto, Y., Gunasekaran, A., & Helo, P. (2017). Building the “Triple R” in global manufacturing.
International Journal of Production Economics, 183, 607–619.
Kumar, V. N. S. A., Kumar, V., Brady, M., Garza-Reyes, J. A., & Simpson, M. (2017). Resolving
forward-reverse logistics multi-period model using evolutionary algorithms. International
Journal of Production Economics, 183, 458–469.
Lau, H. C. W., Hui, I. K., Chan, F. T. S., & Wong, C. W. Y. (2002). Monitoring the supply of
products in a supply chain environment: A fuzzy neural approach. Expert Systems, 19(4),
235–243.
Lee, H. L. (2004). The triple-A supply chain.Harvard Business Review,82, 102-113
Lee, C. K. M., Ho, W., Ho, G. T. S., & Lau, H. C. W. (2011). Design and development of logistics
workflow systems for demand management with RFID. Expert Systems with Applications,
38(5), 5428–5437.
Lezoche, M., Panetto, H., Kacprzyk, J., Hernandez, J. E., & Díaz, M. M. E. A. (2020). Agri-food
4.0: A survey of the supply chains and technologies for the future agriculture. Computers in
Industry, 117.
Li, Y., Kramer, M. R., Beulens, A. J. M., & Van Der Vorst, J. G. A. J. (2010). A framework for
early warning and proactive control systems in food supply chain networks. Computers in
Industry, 61(9), 852–862.
Liao, H., Tang, M., Luo, L., Li, C., Chiclana, F., & Zeng, X. -J. (2018). A bibliometric analysis and
visualization of medical big data research. Sustainability, 10, 1–18.
Mayring, P. (2014). Qualitative content analysis: Theoretical background and
procedures. Approaches to Qualitative Research in Mathematics Education, 365–380.
Mentzer, J. T., DeWitt, W., Keebler, J. S., Min, S., Nix, N. W., Smith, C. D., & Zacharia, Z. G.
(2001). Defining supply chain management. Journal of Business Logistics, 22, 1–25.
Mogre, R., Talluri, S. S., & Damico, F. (2016). A decision framework to mitigate supply chain risks:
An application in the offshore-wind industry. IEEE Transactions on Engineering
Management, 63(3), 316–325.
Mokhtarinejad, M., Ahmadi, A., Karimi, B., & Rahmati, S. H. A. (2015). A novel learning-based
approach for a new integrated location-routing and scheduling problem within cross-docking
considering direct shipment. Applied Soft Computing, 34, 274–285.
Moraga, R., Rabelo, L., Jones, A., & Vila, J. (2011). Using neural networks to monitor supply chain
behaviour. International Journal of Computer Applications in Technology, 40, 53–63.
Min, H. (2010). Artificial intelligence in supply chain management: theory and applications.
International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications, 13, 13–39.
Nabelsi, V., & Gagnon, S. (2017). Information technology strategy for a patient-oriented, lean, and
agile integration of hospital pharmacy and medical equipment supply chains. International
Journal of Production Research, 55(14), 3929–3945.
Neto, J. Q. F., Walther, G., Bloemhof, J., van Nunen, J. A. E. & Spengler, T. (2010). From closed-
loop to sustainable supply chains: The WEEE case. International Journal of Production, 48,
4463-4481.
Ngai, E. W. T., Peng, S., Alexander, P., & Moon, K. K. L. (2014). Decision support and intelligent
systems in the textile and apparel supply chain: An academic review of research articles.
Expert Systems with Applications, 41, 81–91.
Nguyen, T., Zhou, L., Spiegler, V., Ieromonachou, P., & Lin, Y. (2018). Big data analytics in supply
chain management: A state-of-the-art literature review. Computers & Operations
Research, 98, 254–264.
Ni, D., Xiao, Z., & Lim, M. K. (2020). A systematic review of the research trends of machine
learning in supply chain management. International Journal of Machine Learning and
Cybernetics, 11, 1463–1482.
Nie, D., Qu, T., Liu, Y., Li, C., & Huang, G. Q. (2019). Improved augmented Lagrangian
coordination for optimizing supply chain configuration with multiple sharing elements in
industrial cluster. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 119(4), 743–773.
Nikolopoulos, K. I., Babai, M. Z., & Bozos, K. (2016). Forecasting supply chain sporadic demand
with nearest neighbor approaches. International Journal of Production Economics, 177,
139–148.
Phulwani, P. R., Kumar, D., & Goyal, P. (2020). A Systematic Literature Review and Bibliometric
Analysis of Recycling Behavior. Journal of Global Marketing, 33, 354–376.
Ponte, B., Ruano, L., Pino, R., & De Fuentela, D. (2015). The bullwhip effect in water demand
management: Taming it through an artificial neural networks-based system. Journal of Water
Supply: Research and Technology. – AQUA, 64, 290–301.
Pozzi, R., & Strozzi, F. (2018). How assembly systems are adopting the technologies of I40: A
preliminary landscape. Industrial Systems Engineering, 369–375.
Rajesh, R. (2020). A grey-layered ANP based decision support model for analyzing strategies of
resilience in electronic supply chains. Engineering Applications of Artificial
Intelligence, 87, 103338.
Repoussis, P. P., Paraskevopoulos, D. C., Zobolas, G., Tarantilis, C. D., & Ioannou, G. (2009). A
web-based decision support system for waste lube oils collection and recycling. European
Journal of Operational Research, 195(3), 676–700.
Riahi, Y., & Riahi, S. (2018). Big data and big data analytics: Concepts, types and technologies.
International Journal of Research Engineering, 5(9), 524–528.
Rodger, J. A. (2014). Application of a fuzzy feasibility Bayesian probabilistic estimation of supply
chain backorder aging, unfilled backorders, and customer wait time using stochastic
simulation with Markov blankets. Expert Systems with Applications, 41(16), 7005–7022.
Salmi, L., & Holmström, J. (2004). Monitoring new product introductions with sell-through data
from channel partners. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 9(3), 209–
212.
Scott, J., Ho, W., Dey, P. K., & Talluri, S. (2015). A decision support system for supplier selection
and order allocation in stochastic, multi-stakeholder and multi-criteria environments.
International Journal of Production Economics, 166, 226–237.
Seuring, S., & Müller, M. (2008). From a literature review to a conceptual framework for sustainable
supply chain management. Journal of Cleaner Production, 16(15), 1699–1710.
Skjølsvik, T., Pemer, F., & Løwendahl, B. (2017). Strategic management of professional service
firms: Reviewing ABS journals and identifying key research themes. Journal of Professions
and Organization, 4, 203–225.
Stefan, S., & Stefan, G. (2012). Conducting content‐analysis based literature reviews in supply chain
management. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 17, 544–555.
Swaminathan, J. M., Smith, S. F., & Sadeh, N. M. (1998). Modeling supply chain dynamics: A
multiagent approach. Decision Sciences, 29(3), 607–632..
Tawfik, G. M., Dila, K. A. S., Mohamed, M. Y. F., Tam, D. N. H., Kien, N. D., Ahmed, A. M., &
Huy, N. T. (2019). A step by step guide for conducting a systematic review and meta-
analysis with simulation data. Tropical Medicine and Health, 47, 46.
Vahdani, B., Iranmanesh, S. H., Mousavi, S. M., & Abdollahzade, M. (2012). A locally linear neuro-
fuzzy model for supplier selection in cosmetics industry. Applied Mathematical
Modelling, 36(10), 4714–4727.
Van Aart, C. J., Wielinga, B., & Schreiber, G. (2004). Organizational building blocks for design of
distributed intelligent system. International Journal of Human Computer Studies, 61(5),
567–599.
Werthmann, D., Brandwein, D., Ruthenbeck, C., Scholz-Reiter, B., & Freitag, M. (2017). Towards
a standardised information exchange within finished vehicle logistics based on RFID and
EPCIS. International Journal of Production Research, 55(14), 4136–4152.
Wolfert, S., Ge, L., Verdouw, C., & Bogaardt, M. -J. (2017). Big data in smart farming – A
review. Agricultural Systems, 153, 69–80.
Yong-Hak, J. (2013). Web of science. Thomson Reuters.
http://wokinfo.com/media/pdf/WoSFS_08_7050.pdf
Yu, L., Zhao, Y., Tang, L., & Yang, Z. (2019). Online big data-driven oil consumption forecasting
with Google Trends. International Journal of Forecasting, 35(1), 213–223.
Xu, J., & Ding, C. (2011). A class of chance constrained multiobjective linear programming with
birandom coefficients and its application to vendors selection. International Journal of
Production Economics, 131, 709–720.
Zhang, Q., Vonderembse, M. A., & Lim, J. S. (2006). Spanning flexibility: Supply chain
information dissemination drives strategy development and customer satisfaction. Supply
Chain Management, 11, 390–399.
Zhao, D., & Strotmann, A. (2015). Analysis and visualization of citation networks: Synthesis
lectures on information concepts, retrieval, and services.
Zhou, W., & Piramuthu, S. (2013). Remanufacturing with RFID item-level information:
Optimization, waste reduction and quality improvement. International Journal of
Production Economics, 145(2), 647–657.
Zupic, I., & Čater, T. (2014). Bibliometric methods in management and
organization. Organizational Research Methods, 18(3), 429–472.

Author Contributions
Youssra Riahi: study design, formal analysis, software and coding, visualization, writing, paper
review and editing. Tarik Saikouk: conceptualization, supervision, paper review. Angappa
Gunasekaran: paper review, supervision.

Disclosure Statement
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
Appendix 1
Journal-Wise Distribution of Selected Papers

Source Articles
International Journal of Production Research 32
Expert Systems with Applications 26
International Journal of Production Economics 21
Decision Support Systems 15
European Journal of Operational Research 13
Production Planning and Control 6
Computers in Industry 3
Computers and Operations Research 2
IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 2
IEEE Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics: Systems 2
Journal of the Operational Research Society 2
Decision Sciences 1
European Journal of Information Systems 1
IEEE Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics Part A: Systems and Humans 1
Information Systems Research 1
International Journal of Forecasting 1
International Journal of Human Computer Studies 1
Journal of Computer Information Systems 1
Journal of Enterprise Information Management 1
Journal of Operations Management 1
Manufacturing and Service Operations Management 1
MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems 1
Supply Chain Management: An International Journal 1

Appendix 2
Systematic Literature Review
 Level of AI SC Processes
Sector / Industry of
Author(s) Data Algorithm /
Application Plan Source Make Deliver Return Enable
Analytics Technique
Cai and Lo (2020) PS AI algorithms review Retail ✓
Lezoche et al. (2020) DS AI algorithms review Agri-food ✓
Ren et al. (2020) PS - Reverse logistics ✓
Dimensionality
Flores and Villalobos (2020) PS Agriculture ✓
Reduction
Badakhshan et al. (2020) PS Genetic algorithm Distribution ✓
Brevik et al. (2020) PS Genetic algorithm Food ✓
Bag et al. (2020) DS AI algorithms review Green supply chain ✓
Govindan et al. (2019) DS Swarm intelligence Vehicle routing ✓
Semiconductor
Fowler et al. (2019) PS - ✓
supply chain
Priore et al. (2019) DS C4.5 algorithm Wholesaling ✓
Puche et al. (2019) PS - Simulation-based ✓
SVM / ANN /
Baryannis et al. (2019) DS Review ✓
Bayesian networks
Resource allocation
Schtter et al. (2019) PS - ✓
in food retail
Sharahi and Khalili-Damghani
PS Genetic algorithm Natural gas industry ✓
(2019)
Zhao et al. (2019) DS - Retail ✓
Kellner et al. (2019) DS - Automotive ✓
Dubey et al. (2019) DS AI algorithms review Manufacturing ✓
Infrastructure
Threr et al. (2019) DS AI algorithms review ✓
development
Fertilizer
Azzamouri et al. (2019) DS - ✓
Production
Uppari and Hasija (2019) DS - Laboratory ✓
Yu et al. (2019) PD Decision tree Oil industry ✓
Lechner and Reimann (2019) DS - Reprocessing ✓
Papagiannidis et al. (2018) DS Clustering Urbanism ✓
Villegas and Pedregal (2018) DS Kalman filter Grocery retail ✓
Particle swarm
Hong et al. (2018) DS Liquor industry ✓
Optimization
Gupta et al. (2018) DS - Process industry ✓
Hombach et al. (2018) DS - Biofuel ✓
Wang et al. (2018) DS - Vehicle routing ✓
Dellino et al. (2018) PD Genetic algorithm Food ✓
Kusiak (2018) DS Data mining Manufacturing ✓
 algorithms

Regression trees /
Simchi and Wu (2018) DS Online retail ✓
random forest

Logistic regression /
support vector
Ma et al. (2018) PS Manufacturing ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Machine / decision
tree
Kannan et al. (2018) DS - Textile industry ✓
Yazdani et el. (2017) PS - Agriculture ✓
Wruck et al. (2017) PS - E-commerce ✓
Genetic algorithms /
Wanke et al. (2017) DS Retail ✓
ANN
Bogataj et al. (2017) PS - Food delivery ✓
Pharmaceutical
Santos et al. (2017) PS - ✓
industry
Guarnaschell et al. (2017) PS - Wood industry ✓
Nabelsi and Gagnon (2017) PS - Healthcare ✓ ✓
Werthmann et al. (2017) DS - Automotive ✓
Imen et al. (2017) DS ANN Simulation-based ✓
Xu et al. (2017) DS AI algorithms review Simulation-based ✓
Chang et al. (2017) DS Genetic algorithm Food ✓

Bioinspired
Zhang et al. (2017) PS Simulation-based ✓
algorithm

Artificial immune
Manufacturing
Kumar et al. (2017) PS systems / particle ✓
swarm optimization

Kristianto et al. (2017) DS AI algorithms review Manufacturing ✓

Multi-objective
Zhang et al. (2016) PS Simulation-based ✓
artificial bee colony
Moncayo and Mastrocinque (2016) PS Artificial WD Simulation-based ✓
Dev et al. (2016) DS Decision tree Simulation-based ✓
Dweiri et al. (2016) PS - Automotive ✓
Charles et al. (2016) PS - Humanities ✓ ✓
Mogre et al. (216) PS - Offshore wind ✓
Nikolopoulos et al. (2016) PD Nearest neighbor Automotive ✓
Syntetos et al. (2016) DS - Review ✓
Zimmer et al. (2016) DS AI algorithms review Review ✓
Erskine et al. (2016) DS - Geospatial ✓
Kumar et al. (2015) PS - Green supply chain ✓

Borade and Sweeney (2015) PS Genetic algorithm Food manufacturing ✓

Engineering,
Peiris et al. (2015) DS - procurement, and ✓
construction

Court et al. (2015) DS - Multi sector ✓

De Matta and Miller (2015) DS - Simulation-based ✓
Scott et al. (2015) PS AI algorithms review Bioenergy ✓
Intelligent
Clothing
Guo et al. (2015) PS optimization ✓
manufacturing
algorithms
Rodger (2014) PD Genetic algorithm Aerospace industry ✓
Mascle and Gosse (2014) PS AI algorithms review Food manufacturing ✓
Shoemaking
Daaboul et al. (2014) PS - ✓
industry
Kumar (2014) DS - Food ✓
Particle swarm
Holimchayachotikul et al. (2014) DS - ✓
intelligence
Boza et al. (2014) PS - Ceramic industry ✓
Fast-moving
Theißen and Spinler (2014) PS - ✓
consumer goods
Groves et al. (2014) DS - Simulation-based ✓
Adaptive tabu search
Miao et al. (2014) PS Simulation-based ✓
(ATS) algorithm
Chong and Bai (2014) PD Neural network Multi-sector ✓
Association rule
Ting et al. (2014) DS Red wine industry ✓
mining
Kallestrup et al. (2014) PS - Oil industry ✓
Roozbeh et al. (2014) DS Genetic algorithm Simulation-based ✓
Yang and Fung (2014) PS - Simulation-based ✓
Manzini et al. (2014) DS Nearest neighbor Distribution ✓
Zhou and Piramuthu (2013) DS - Remanufacturing ✓ ✓
Pump
Latha et al. (2013) PS Genetic algorithm ✓
manufacturing
Banerjee and Golhar (2013) DS - Fashion retail ✓
Liu et al. (2013) DS - Electronics ✓
Dong and Srinivasan (2013) DS - retail / ✓
 manufacturing
Lenny at el. (2013) PS - Malt ✓
Georgiadis and Athanasiou (2013) DS - Remanufacturing ✓
Particle swarm
Latha et al. (2013) DS Simulation-based ✓
intelligence
Moon et al. (2012) PS Genetic algorithm Simulation-based ✓
Support vector
Turrado et al. (2012) PS Retail ✓
machine
Particle swarm
Kadadevaramath et al. (2012) PS Simulation-based ✓
intelligence
Ferreira and Borenstein (2012) DS AI algorithms review Oil industry ✓
Hahn and Kuhn (2012) DS - Retail- ✓
White goods
Erdem and Göen (2012) PS - ✓
manufacturing
Kristianto et al. (2012) PS - Simulation-based ✓
Tako and Robinson (2012) DS - Review ✓
Okongwu et al. (2012) PS - Simulation-based ✓
Flisberg et al. (2012) PS - Petroleum industry ✓
Khataei et al. (2012) DS - Simulation-based ✓
Marchetta et al. (2012) PS Intelligent agent Automotive ✓
Lee et al. (2011) PS ANN Jewelry industry ✓
Artificial immune
Kumar et al. (2011) DS Simulation-based ✓
system algorithm
Ferreira and Borenstein (2011) DS ANN Petroleum industry ✓
Ghandforoush and Sen (2010) DS - Healthcare ✓
Li et al. (2010) PD Neural networks Food ✓
Warre and Chang (2010) DS - Simulation-based ✓
Frhling et al. (2010) DS - Remanufacturing ✓
Zhou et al. (2010) PS - Food ✓
Di Giacomo and Patrizi (2010) DS - Review ✓
Qu et al. (2010) DS Genetic algorithm Simulation-based ✓
Gorgiadis et al. (2010) DS - Remanufacturing ✓
Boran and Goztepe (2010) DS - Simulation-based ✓
Collins et al. (2010) DS - Simulation-based
Genetic algorithm /
Particle swarm
Kumar et al. (2010) DS Simulation-based ✓
optimization /
artificial bee colony
Arora et al. (2010) PS - Simulation-based ✓
Electric and
Quariguasi et al. (2010) PS - ✓
electronic industry
 Lauras et al. (2010) PS - Aerospace ✓
Threr et al. (2010) DS - Simulation-based ✓
Hu and Bidanda (2009) DS - Electronics industry ✓
Chatfield et al. (2009) DS - Simulation-based ✓
Repoussis et al. (2009) DS - Oil industry ✓ ✓
O’Donnell et al. (2009) DS Genetic algorithm Simulation-based ✓
Consumer goods
Effendigil et al. (2009) DS ANN ✓
industry
Pharmaceutical
Shang et al. (2008) DS - ✓
industry
Jain et al. (2008) DS - Simulation-based ✓
Baptiste et al. (2008) DS - Simulation-based ✓
Thammakoranonta et al. (2008) PS - Simulation-based ✓ ✓
Nissen and Sengupta (2006) DS - Review ✓
Van et al. (2004) DS - Retail ✓
Salmi and Holmström (2004) PS - Retail ✓
Schneeweiss (2003) DS - Review ✓
Giannoccaro and Pontrandolfo
PS SMART algorithm Simulation-based ✓
(2002)
Pontrandolfo et al. (2002) PS SMART algorithm Simulation-based ✓
Ba et al. (2001) DS - Review ✓
Gradient descent
Lin and Pai (2000) DS Simulation-based ✓
algorithm
Swaminathan et al. (1998) DS - Simulation-based ✓
Authors DS AI algorithms review Review ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

1st Paper Highlights

 Systematic literature review based on 136 papers on artificial intelligence applications in supply
chain.
 The distribution of the different AI techniques used across the SCOR areas is presented.
 A classification of the research articles is proposed based on four critical structural dimensions.
 Future research perspectives and areas needing further investigations are suggested.