MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2137507954 · doi:10.1139/x08-017

RuttOpt — a decision support system for routing of logging trucks

2008· article· en· W2137507954 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Gert Andersson, Patrik Flisberg, Bertil Lidén, Mikael Rönnqvist

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVehicle Routing Optimization Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTruckGantt chartComputer scienceScheduling (production processes)LoggingDecision support systemScheduleDatabaseRange (aeronautics)Vehicle routing problemTime horizonInformation systemOperations researchRouting (electronic design automation)Data miningEngineeringMathematical optimizationOperations managementSystems engineeringGeographyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe the decision support system RuttOpt, which is developed for scheduling logging trucks in the forest industry. The system is made up of a number of modules. One module is the Swedish road database NVDB, which consists of detailed information of all of the roads in Sweden. This also includes a tool to compute distances between locations. A second module is an optimization routine that finds a schedule, i.e., set of routes for all trucks. This is based on a two-phase algorithm where linear programming and a standard tabu search method are used. A third module is a database storing all relevant information. At the center of the system is a user interface where information and results can be viewed on maps, Gantt schedules, and result reports. The RuttOpt system has been used in a number of case studies and we describe four of these. The case studies have been made in both forest companies and hauling companies. The cases range from 10 to 110 trucks and with a planning horizon ranging between 1 and 5 days. The results show that the system can be used to solve large case studies and that the potential savings are in the range 5%–30%.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.992
Threshold uncertainty score0.087

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0260.005

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.271 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations51
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicVehicle Routing Optimization MethodsFrench-language works237,207