MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2808256502 · doi:10.1080/01605682.2017.1390532

Mathematical model, heuristics and exact method for order picking in narrow aisles

2017· article· en· W2808256502 on OpenAlexafffund
Thomas Chabot, Leandro C. Coelho, Jacques Renaud, Jean‐François Côté

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Operational Research Society · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Manufacturing and Logistics Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalTransport Canada
FundersCanadian Natural Resources Limited
KeywordsAisleHeuristicsOrder pickingComputer scienceOperator (biology)Set (abstract data type)Mathematical optimizationRepresentation (politics)Order (exchange)Operations researchPurchasingIndustrial engineeringWarehouseMathematicsOperations managementEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Order picking is one of the most challenging operations in distribution centre management and one of the most important sources of costs. One way to reduce the lead time and associated costs is to minimise the total amount of work for collecting all orders. This paper is motivated by a collaboration with an industrial partner who delivers furniture and electronic equipment. We have modelled their narrow aisles order picking problem as a vehicle routing problem through a series of distance transformations between all pairs of locations. Security issues arising when working on narrow aisles impose an extra layer of difficulty when determining the routes. We show that these security measures and the operator equipment allow us to decompose the problem per aisle. In other words, if one has to pick orders from three aisles in the warehouse, it is possible to decompose the problem and create three different instances of the picking problem. Our approach yields an exact representation of all possible picking sequences. We also show that neglecting 2D aspects and solving the problem over a 1D warehouse yields significant difference in the solutions, which are then suboptimal for the real 2D case. We have solved a large set of instances reproducing realistic configurations using a combination of heuristics and an exact algorithm, minimising the total distance travelled for picking all items. Through extensive computational experiments, we identify which of our methods are better suited for each aisle configuration. We also compare our solutions with those obtained by the company order picking procedures, showing that improvements can be achieved by using our approach.

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)0.003
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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.326 · 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

Citations40
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Operational Research SocietySame topicAdvanced Manufacturing and Logistics OptimizationFrench-language works237,207