MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2884232159 · doi:10.1177/0361198118786620

Fuel Consumption Optimization Model for the Multi-Period Inventory Routing Problem

2018· article· en· W2884232159 on OpenAlexaff
Chun Cheng, Mingyao Qi, Louis-Martin Rousseau

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research Board · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVehicle Routing Optimization Methods
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFuel efficiencyVariable (mathematics)Consumption (sociology)Integer programmingRouting (electronic design automation)Computer scienceOperations researchEnvironmental scienceAutomotive engineeringEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the traditional multi-period inventory routing problem (MIRP), traveling distance is considered as the only measurement of vehicles’ variable transportation cost; however, it is in fact the fuel consumption cost, not the distance, which is the greater concern. This paper evaluates vehicles’ variable transportation cost by fuel consumption, which is influenced by distance, load, and fuel price. It presents an integer program to formally characterize the fuel consumption considered MIRP (FCMIRP), which can help enterprises obtain a more accurate tradeoff between transportation and inventory costs. It also benefits the environment, because reducing fuel consumption will curb carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) emissions. Valid inequalities are added to strengthen the model and use a branch-and-cut algorithm. Computational tests indicate that the FCMIRP can decrease fuel consumption and total cost over the traditional model. Factors that influence the results of FCMIRP are also discussed.

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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.157
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations5
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research BoardSame topicVehicle Routing Optimization MethodsFrench-language works237,207