Multiple criteria optimization method for the vehicle assignment problem in a bus transportation company
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A vehicle assignment problem (VAP) in a road, long‐haul, passenger transportation company with heterogeneous fleet of buses is considered in the paper. The mathematical model of the VAP is formulated in terms of multiobjective, combinatorial optimization. It has a strategic, long‐term character and takes into account four criteria that represent interests of both passengers and the company's management. The decision consists in the definition of weekly operating frequency (number of rides per week) of buses on international routes between Polish and Western European cities. The VAP is solved in a step‐wise procedure. In the first step a sample of efficient (Pareto‐optimal) solutions is generated using an original metaheuristic method called Pareto Memetic Algorithm (PMA). In the second step this sample is reviewed and evaluated by the Decision Maker (DM). In this phase an interactive, multiple criteria analysis method with graphical facilities, called Light Beam Search (LBS), is applied. The method helps the DM to define his/her preferences, direct the search process and select the most satisfactory solution.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
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".