MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2291592553 · doi:10.1057/jors.2015.90

Solving the vehicle routing problem with lunch break arising in the furniture delivery industry

2015· article· en· W2291592553 on OpenAlexaff
Leandro C. Coelho, Jean-Philippe Gagliardi, Jacques Renaud, Ángel Ruiz

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Operational Research Society · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVehicle Routing Optimization Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVehicle routing problemComputer scienceHeuristicMathematical optimizationRouting (electronic design automation)Integer programmingHeuristicsLinear programmingProcess (computing)Last mile (transportation)Operations researchAlgorithmMathematicsMileArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we solve the Vehicle Routing Problem with Lunch Break (VRPLB), which arises when drivers must take pauses during their shift, for example, for lunch breaks. Driver breaks have already been considered in long haul transportation when drivers must rest during their travel, but the underlying optimization problem remains difficult and few contributions can be found for less than truckload and last mile distribution contexts. This problem, which appears in the furniture delivery industry, includes rich features such as time windows and heterogeneous vehicles. In this paper, we evaluate the performance of a new mathematical formulation for the VRPLB and of a fast and high performing heuristic. The mixed integer linear programming formulation has the disadvantage of roughly doubling the number of nodes, and thus significantly increasing the size of the distance matrix and the number of variables. Consequently, standard branch-and-bound algorithms are only capable of solving small-sized instances. In order to tackle large instances provided by an industrial partner, we propose a fast multi-start randomized local search heuristic tailored for the VRPLB, which is shown to be very efficient. Through a series of computational experiments, we show that solving the VRPLB without explicitly considering the pauses during the optimization process can lead to a number of infeasibilities. These results demonstrate the importance of integrating drivers pauses in the resolution process.

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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.272 · 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

Citations36
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Operational Research SocietySame topicVehicle Routing Optimization MethodsFrench-language works237,207