MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM FOR SOLVING THE STREET ROUTING PROBLEM

2008· article· en· W2009946293 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueTransport · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVehicle Routing Optimization Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVehicle routing problemHeuristicsRouting (electronic design automation)Computer scienceKey (lock)SoftwareOperations researchRange (aeronautics)Geographic information systemPath (computing)EngineeringComputer networkComputer securityGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Servicing a large number of customers in a city zone is often a considerable part of many logistics chains. The capacity of one delivery vehicle is limited, but, at the same time, it usually serves plenty of customers. This problem is often called a Street Routing Problem (SRP). Key differences between Vehicle Routing Problem (VRP) and SRP are presented here. The main problem of SRP is that when the number of customers is huge, the number of delivery path combinations becomes enormous. As the experimental results show in the case of SRP the error on the length of delivery routes based on an expert's judgment when compared to the optimal solution is in the range of 10–25%. As presented in the paper, only using decision support systems such as Geographical Information Systems (GIS) makes possible to effectively manage SRP. Besides classical measurements used in VRP, such as total length of routes or time required for delivery in each route, other measurements, mostly qualitative ones, are presented. All of these are named as visual attractiveness. This paper discusses possible relationships between quantitative and qualitative measurements that give a promise for finding better solutions of SRP. Several new types of heuristics for solving SRP are evaluated and afterward compared using the real data. One of the key properties of GIS to use routing software is its flexible interactive and user‐friendly environment. Routing software can find a good solution and explore the possibilities while an expert later can change the calculated routes to explore other possibilities based on the expert's judgment. This paper presents a practical use of new heuristics with the ArcView and solution of address mail for several cities in Slovakia served by Slovak Post ltd. Other Decision Support Systems that solve SRP are presented as TRANSCAD developed by Caliper Corporation or GeoRoute promoted by Canadian Post and GIRO.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.645
Threshold uncertainty score0.502

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.227 · 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