The Traveling Salesman Problem with Pickups, Deliveries, and Handling Costs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper introduces a new variant of the one-to-many-to-one single vehicle pickup and delivery problems (SVPDP) that incorporates the handling cost incurred when rearranging the load at the customer locations. The simultaneous optimization of routing and handling costs is difficult, and the resulting loading patterns are hard to implement in practice. However, this option makes economical sense in contexts where the routing cost dominates the handling cost. We have proposed some simplified policies applicable to such contexts. The first is a two-phase heuristic in which the tour having minimum routing cost is initially determined by optimally solving an SVPDP, and the optimal handling policy is then determined for that tour. In addition, branch-and-cut algorithms based on integer linear programming formulations are proposed, in which routing and handling decisions are simultaneously optimized, but the handling decisions are restricted to three simplified policies. The formulations are strengthened by means of problem specific valid inequalities. The proposed methods have been extensively tested on instances involving up to 25 customers and hundreds of items. Our results show the impact of the handling aspect on the customer sequencing and indicate that the simplified handling policies favorably compare with the optimal one.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".