A priori optimization with recourse for the vehicle routing problem with hard time windows and stochastic service times
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The vehicle routing problem with hard time windows and stochastic service times (VRPTW-ST) introduced by Errico et al. (2013) in the form of a chance-constrained model mainly differs from other vehicle routing problems with stochastic service or travel times considered in the literature by the presence of hard time windows. This makes the problem extremely challenging. In this paper, we model the VRPTW-ST as a two-stage stochastic program and define two recourse policies to recover operations feasibility when the first stage plan turns out to be infeasible. We formulate the VRPTW-ST as a set partitioning problem and solve it by exact branch-cut-and-price algorithms. Specifically, we developed efficient labeling algorithms by suitably choosing label components, determining extension functions, and developing lower and upper bounds on partial route reduced cost to be used in the column generation step. Results on benchmark data show that our methods are able to solve instances with up to 50 customers for both recourse policies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it