MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2790276044 · doi:10.1155/2018/1732091

Minimizing the Impact of Large Freight Vehicles in the City: A Multicriteria Vision for Route Planning and Type of Vehicles

2018· article· en· W2790276044 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sara Ezquerro, Juan P. Romero, José Luis Moura, Juan Benavente, Ángel Ibeas

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUrban and Freight Transport Logistics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTruckTransport engineeringFlow networkOperations researchTotal costCity logisticsFleet managementTypologyTransportation planningComputer scienceBusinessEngineeringAutomotive engineeringMathematical optimizationGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The impact of freight transport in cities is significant, and as such correct planning and management thereof help reduce their enormous negative impact. Above all, the special large vehicles have a greater impact than the remainder of freight vehicles, so a special attention should be paid to them. The vehicles which supply or pick up large amounts of goods at specific points throughout the city are an example of this type of vehicles. The aim of this paper is to minimize the cost of this freight transport type from a social, economic, and environmental viewpoint. To this effect, an optimization model has been proposed based on bilevel mathematical programming which minimizes the total system costs. City network model data are obtained on the lower level such as vehicle flow and travelling times, which are then used on the upper level to calculate total system costs. The model has been applied to a real case in Santander (Spain), whose final result shows the size and typology of the fleet of vehicles necessary to have the least impact on the city. The greater the vehicles size is (i.e., using fewer trucks), the less the cost of the freight transport is.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.707
Threshold uncertainty score0.211

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations10
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicUrban and Freight Transport LogisticsFrench-language works237,207