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 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
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

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.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.162
Threshold uncertainty score0.404

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.068
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