Parallel algorithms for vehicle routing problems
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Vehicle routing problems involve the navigation of one or more vehicles through a network of locations. Locations have associated handling times as well as time windows during which they are active. The arcs connecting locations have time costs associated with them. In this paper, we consider two different problems in single vehicle routing. The first is to find least time cost routes between all pairs of nodes in a network for navigating vehicles; we call this the all pairs routing problem. We show that there is an O(log/sup 2/ n) time parallel algorithm using a polynomial number of processors for this problem on a CREW PRAM. We next consider the problem in which a vehicle services all locations in a network. Here, locations can be passed through at any time but only serviced during their time window. The general problem is NP-complete under even fairly stringent restrictions but polynomial algorithms have been developed for some special cases. In particular, when the network is a line, there is no time cost in servicing a location, and all time windows are unbounded at either their lower or upper end, O(n/sup 2/) algorithms have been developed. We show that under the same conditions, we can reduce this problem to the all pairs routing problem and therefore obtain an O(log/sup 2/ n) time parallel algorithm on a CREW PRAM.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it