Skip to content

Fix supply chain feedback: consumption-aware production + GPU backlog…#89

Merged
jakechinitz merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
claude/fix-ai-efficiency-cap-db3i3
Feb 15, 2026
Merged

Fix supply chain feedback: consumption-aware production + GPU backlog…#89
jakechinitz merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
claude/fix-ai-efficiency-cap-db3i3

Conversation

@jakechinitz

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

… separation

Three structural issues caused unrealistic behavior where all components showed growing production AND inventory while GPUs remained gated:

  1. Component production targeted the unconstrained plan (planDemand) even when actual consumption was much lower due to a different component being the fleet bottleneck. Non-binding components produced at 2-3x what was being consumed, accumulating unbounded inventory.

  2. Component expansion was triggered by planDemand * growthRatio, building capacity for phantom demand that nobody actually needed.

  3. GPU backlog grew from ALL deployment shortfalls (including component gating), inflating the GPU plan via backlog paydown, which inflated component demand further — a positive feedback spiral.

Fixes:

  • effectiveDemand = min(planDemand, actualConsumption * 1.5): producers respond to what customers actually take, with 50% growth headroom
  • STOCK nodes cap inventory at 4 months of effective consumption
  • Backlog, tightness, and expansion all use effectiveDemand
  • GPU backlog only grows from GPU production shortfalls, not component gating (component shortfalls tracked in component backlogs)
  • GPU buffer target tracks actual deployment, not unconstrained plan

The binding constraint (whichever component has lowest supply/intensity) still produces at full capacity — only non-binding components throttle.

https://claude.ai/code/session_01PHK9qmguUSTyvykAoho467

… separation

Three structural issues caused unrealistic behavior where all components
showed growing production AND inventory while GPUs remained gated:

1. Component production targeted the unconstrained plan (planDemand) even
   when actual consumption was much lower due to a different component
   being the fleet bottleneck. Non-binding components produced at 2-3x
   what was being consumed, accumulating unbounded inventory.

2. Component expansion was triggered by planDemand * growthRatio, building
   capacity for phantom demand that nobody actually needed.

3. GPU backlog grew from ALL deployment shortfalls (including component
   gating), inflating the GPU plan via backlog paydown, which inflated
   component demand further — a positive feedback spiral.

Fixes:
- effectiveDemand = min(planDemand, actualConsumption * 1.5): producers
  respond to what customers actually take, with 50% growth headroom
- STOCK nodes cap inventory at 4 months of effective consumption
- Backlog, tightness, and expansion all use effectiveDemand
- GPU backlog only grows from GPU production shortfalls, not component
  gating (component shortfalls tracked in component backlogs)
- GPU buffer target tracks actual deployment, not unconstrained plan

The binding constraint (whichever component has lowest supply/intensity)
still produces at full capacity — only non-binding components throttle.

https://claude.ai/code/session_01PHK9qmguUSTyvykAoho467
@jakechinitz
jakechinitz merged commit 685791a into main Feb 15, 2026
2 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants