The Vehicle Routing Problem with Floating Targets: Formulation and Solution Approaches
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper addresses a generalization of the vehicle routing problem in which the pick-up locations of the targets are nonstationary. We refer to this problem as the vehicle routing problem with floating targets and the main characteristic is that targets are allowed to move from their initial home locations while waiting for a vehicle. This problem models new applications in drone routing, ridesharing, and logistics where a vehicle agrees to meet another vehicle or a customer at a location that is away from the designated home location. We propose a Mixed Integer Second Order Cone Program (MISOCP) formulation for the problem, along with valid inequalities for strengthening the continuous relaxation. We further exploit the problem structure using a Lagrangian decomposition and propose an exact branch-and-price algorithm. Computational results on instances with varying characteristics are presented and the results are compared to the solution of the full problem using CPLEX. The proposed valid inequalities reduce the computational time of CPLEX by up to 30% on average while the proposed branch and price is capable of solving instances where CPLEX fails in finding the optimal solution within the imposed time limit.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".