Supply Chain Resilience Optimization Integrating Transformers and Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.4108/eetsis.14737Keywords:
Supply chain resilience, Transformer, Multi-agent reinforcement learning, Disruption prediction, Digital twin, Adaptive recoveryAbstract
INTRODUCTION: Manufacturing supply chains face increasing vulnerabilities from delayed risk identification, conflicting node-level decisions, and escalating recovery costs, particularly under complex disruption scenarios. Existing approaches often lack proactive, coordinated responses across autonomous supply chain nodes, limiting their ability to anticipate disruptions and synchronize mitigation actions effectively. To address these gaps, this paper proposes an integrated resilience optimization framework that combines predictive analytics with multi-agent coordination.
OBJECTIVES: The primary objective is to develop a supply chain resilience framework, termed T-MARL, that enables autonomous suppliers, manufacturers, warehousing nodes, and distributors to: (1) predict future disruption probabilities using temporal risk precursor data, and (2) execute coordinated, proactive replenishment, production, and distribution decisions under inventory and capacity constraints. The framework aims to improve resilience index, reduce total operating costs, and shorten recovery time compared to baseline strategies, while also examining the sensitivity of performance gains to prediction noise and communication latency.
METHODS: The T-MARL framework models each supply chain node as an independent agent. A lightweight Transformer captures temporal features from 6-dimensional risk precursor sequences over 12 consecutive periods to forecast disruption probabilities. These predictions feed into a value-decomposition multi-agent reinforcement learning mechanism with centralized training–decentralized execution, where a value-decomposition network orchestrates cross-node actions. Risk-constrained action gating ensures that proactive responses adhere to inventory and capacity limits. A digital twin simulation environment was built with fixed random seeds, covering three scenarios—single-source supply disruption, demand surge, and compound disruption. Five strategies were tested, with 30 runs per unit using common random number pairing.
RESULTS: On the trajectory-held-out test set, the Transformer achieved an AUC of 0.722 and an F1-score of 0.586, while Random Forest achieved a slightly higher AUC of 0.724. Under the compound disruption scenario, T-MARL attained a resilience index of 0.849—a 1.63 percentage-point gain over VDN-MARL -reduced total cost by 14.7%, and shortened average recovery time from 1.67 periods to zero. T-MARL also achieved lower operating costs while maintaining service levels comparable to rule-based strategies. However, the paper also found that prediction noise and communication latency diminish these performance gains.
CONCLUSION: This research contributes a reproducible digital twin analysis framework for disruption prediction, cross-node collaborative response, and rapid recovery in manufacturing supply chains. While T-MARL demonstrates significant improvements in resilience and cost-efficiency under ideal conditions, practical deployment must account for real-world imperfections such as noisy forecasts and delayed communications. The framework provides a scalable foundation for future work on adaptive, data-driven supply chain resilience.
References
[1] Tukamuhabwa B R, Stevenson M, Busby J, Zorzini M. Supply chain resilience: Definition, review and theoretical foundations for further study. International Journal of Production Research, 2015, 53(18): 5592-5623.
[2] Hosseini S, Ivanov D, Dolgui A. Review of quantitative methods for supply chain resilience analysis. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 2019, 125: 285-307.
[3] Dolgui A, Ivanov D, Sokolov B. Ripple effect in the supply chain: An analysis and recent literature. International Journal of Production Research, 2018, 56(1-2): 414-430.
[4] Ivanov D, Dolgui A, Blackhurst J V, Choi T M. Toward supply chain viability theory: From lessons learned through COVID-19 pandemic to viable ecosystems. International Journal of Production Research, 2023, 61(8): 2402-2415.
[5] Ivanov D, Dolgui A. A digital supply chain twin for managing the disruption risks and resilience in the era of Industry 4.0. Production Planning & Control, 2021, 32(9): 775-788.
[6] Guo D, Mantravadi S. The role of digital twins in lean supply chain management: Review and research directions. International Journal of Production Research, 2025, 63(5): 1851-1872.
[7] Kassa A, Kitaw D, Stache U, Beshah B, Degefu G. Artificial intelligence techniques for enhancing supply chain resilience: A systematic literature review, holistic framework, and future research. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 2023, 186: 109714.
[8] Culot G, Podrecca M, Nassimbeni G. Artificial intelligence in supply chain management: A systematic literature review of empirical studies and research directions. Computers in Industry, 2024, 162: 104132.
[9] Jauhar S K, Jani S M, Kamble S S, et al. How to use no-code artificial intelligence to predict and minimize the inventory distortions for resilient supply chains. International Journal of Production Research, 2024, 62(15): 5510-5534.
[10] Chen Z, Ma M, Li T, Wang H, Li C. Long sequence time-series forecasting with deep learning: A survey. Information Fusion, 2023, 97: 101819.
[11] Ahmed S, Nielsen I E, Tripathi A, et al. Transformers in time-series analysis: A tutorial. Circuits, Systems, and Signal Processing, 2023, 42(12): 7433-7466.
[12] Mousa M, van de Berg D, Kotecha N, del Rio-Chanona E A, Mowbray M. An analysis of multi-agent reinforcement learning for decentralized inventory control systems. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 2024, 188: 108783.
[13] Vaswani A, Shazeer N, Parmar N, et al. Attention is all you need[J]. Advances in neural information processing systems, 2017, 30.
[14] Zerveas G, Jayaraman S, Patel D, et al. A transformer-based framework for multivariate time series representation learning[C]//Proceedings of the 27th ACM SIGKDD conference on knowledge discovery & data mining. 2021: 2114-2124.
[15] Lim B, Arık S Ö, Loeff N, et al. Temporal fusion transformers for interpretable multi-horizon time series forecasting[J]. International journal of forecasting, 2021, 37(4): 1748-1764.
[16] Sunehag P, Lever G, Gruslys A, et al. Value-decomposition networks for cooperative multi-agent learning[J]. arXiv preprint arXiv:1706.05296, 2017.
[17] Stranieri F, Fadda E, Stella F. Combining deep reinforcement learning and multi-stage stochastic programming to address the supply chain inventory management problem. International Journal of Production Economics, 2024, 268: 109099.
[18] Kotecha N, del Rio Chanona A. Leveraging graph neural networks and multi-agent reinforcement learning for inventory control in supply chains. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 2025, 199: 109111.
[19] Hu J, Xia L, Huang T, Wu H. A multi-agent deep reinforcement learning approach for multi-echelon inventory optimization and its application to the beer game. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 2025, 203: 104367.
[20] Smyth C, Dennehy D, Fosso Wamba S, Scott M, Harfouche A. Artificial intelligence and prescriptive analytics for supply chain resilience: A systematic literature review and research agenda. International Journal of Production Research, 2024, 62(23): 8537-8561.
[21] Lowe R, Wu Y I, Tamar A, et al. Multi-agent actor-critic for mixed cooperative-competitive environments[J]. Advances in neural information processing systems, 2017, 30.
[22] Oroojlooyjadid A, Nazari M R, Snyder L V, et al. A deep q-network for the beer game: Deep reinforcement learning for inventory optimization[J]. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, 2022, 24(1): 285-304.
[23] Boute R N, Gijsbrechts J, Van Jaarsveld W, et al. Deep reinforcement learning for inventory control: A roadmap[J]. European journal of operational research, 2022, 298(2): 401-412.
[24] Bengio Y, Louradour J, Collobert R, et al. Curriculum learning[C]//Proceedings of the 26th annual international conference on machine learning. 2009: 41-48.
[25] Gijsbrechts J, Boute R N, Van Mieghem J A, et al. Can deep reinforcement learning improve inventory management[J]. Performance on dual sourc-ing, lost sales and multi-echelon problems, 2019.
[26] Achiam J, Held D, Tamar A, et al. Constrained policy optimization[C]//International conference on machine learning. Pmlr, 2017: 22-31.
[27] Tobin J, Fong R, Ray A, et al. Domain randomization for transferring deep neural networks from simulation to the real world[C]//2017 IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems (IROS). IEEE, 2017: 23-30.
[28] Yang Y, Wang M, Wang J, et al. Multi-agent deep reinforcement learning for integrated demand forecasting and inventory optimization in sensor-enabled retail supply chains[J]. Sensors, 2025, 25(8): 2428.
[29] Dehaybe H, Catanzaro D, Chevalier P. Deep reinforcement learning for inventory optimization with non-stationary uncertain demand. European Journal of Operational Research, 2024, 314(2): 433-445.
[30] Wang J, Swartz C L E, Huang K. Risk-averse supply chain management via robust reinforcement learning. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 2025, 192: 108912.
[31] Dolgui A, Ivanov D, Simchi-Levi D. Stress tests for supply chains: Towards resilience and viability. International Journal of Production Research, 2025, 63(9): 3254-3258.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Zhaocheng Wang

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC BY-NC-SA 4.0, which permits copying, redistributing, remixing, transformation, and building upon the material in any medium so long as the original work is properly cited.