MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Vehicle Routing Problem with Time Windows: State‐of‐the‐Art Exact Solution Methods

2011· other· en· W1559962598 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueWiley Encyclopedia of Operations Research and Management Science · 2011
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVehicle Routing Optimization Methods
Canadian institutionsHEC MontréalPolytechnique MontréalGroup for Research in Decision Analysis
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVehicle routing problemSolverBenchmark (surveying)Integer programmingMathematical optimizationSet (abstract data type)Computer scienceInteger (computer science)Variable (mathematics)State (computer science)Routing (electronic design automation)AlgorithmMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The vehicle routing problem with time windows (VRPTW) consists of finding least‐cost vehicle routes to service given customers exactly once each while satisfying the vehicle capacity and customer time windows. The VRPTW has been widely studied. We present here a short survey on the successful exact methods for solving it. These are branch‐cut‐and‐price algorithms, except the most efficient one which solves, by a mixed‐integer programming solver, a reduced set partitioning model obtained by performing variable elimination based on reduced cost. This method was able to solve all well‐known Solomon's benchmark instances except one, outperforming all the other algorithms previously published.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.545
Threshold uncertainty score0.456

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.295 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it