Models and Algorithms for Stochastic and Robust Vehicle Routing with Deadlines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We consider the vehicle routing problem with deadlines under travel time uncertainty in the contexts of stochastic and robust optimization. The problem is defined on a directed graph where a fleet of vehicles is required to visit a given set of nodes and deadlines are imposed at a subset of nodes. In the stochastic vehicle routing problem with deadlines (SVRP-D), the probability distribution of the travel times is assumed to be known and the problem is solved to minimize the sum of probability of deadline violations. In the robust vehicle routing problem with deadlines (RVRP-D), however, the exact probability distribution is unknown but it belongs to a certain family of distributions. The objective of the problem is to optimize a performance measure, called lateness index, which represents the risk of violating the deadlines. Although novel mathematical frameworks have been proposed to solve these problems, the size of the problem that those approaches can handle is relatively small. Our focus in this paper is the computational aspects of the two solution schemes. We introduce formulations that can be applied for the problems with multiple capacitated vehicles and discuss the extensions to the cases of incorporating service times and soft time windows. Furthermore, we develop an algorithm based on a branch-and-cut framework to solve the problems. The experiments show that these approaches provide substantial improvements in computational efficiency compared to the approaches in the literature. Finally, we provide a computational comparison to evaluate the solution quality of the SVRP-D and the RVRP-D. The results show that the RVRP-D produces solutions that are very competitive to those obtained by the SVRP-D with a large number of scenarios, whereas much less sensitive to the distributional uncertainty.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".