MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2132824134 · doi:10.1002/atr.111

Multiple objective optimization of the fleet sizing problem for road freight transportation

2011· article· en· W2132824134 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jacek Żak, Adam Redmer, Piotr Sawicki

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVehicle Routing Optimization Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSizingOperations researchComputer scienceTransportation theorySet (abstract data type)Decision makerQueueing theorySample (material)Pareto principleTransportation planningMathematical optimizationFleet managementTransport engineeringEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SUMMARY A fleet sizing problem (FSP) in a road freight transportation company with heterogeneous fleet and its own technical back‐up facilities is considered in the paper. The mathematical model of the decision problem is formulated in terms of multiple objective mathematical programming based on queuing theory. Technical and economical criteria as well as interests of different stakeholders are taken into account in the problem formulation. The solution procedure is composed of two steps. In the first one, a sample of Pareto‐optimal solutions is generated by an original program called MEGROS. In the second step, this set is reviewed and evaluated, according to the Decision Maker's (DM's) model of preferences. The evaluation of solutions is carried out with an application of an interactive multiple criteria analysis method, called Light Beam Search (LBS). Finally, the DM selects the most desirable, compromise solution. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations69
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicVehicle Routing Optimization MethodsFrench-language works237,207