On-Time Last-Mile Delivery: Order Assignment with Travel-Time Predictors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We study how delivery data can be applied to improve the on-time performance of last-mile delivery services. Motivated by the delivery operations and data of a food delivery service provider, we discuss a framework that integrates travel-time predictors with order-assignment optimization. Such integration enables us to capture the driver’s routing behavior in practice as the driver’s decision-making process is often unobservable or intricate to model. Focusing on the order-assignment problem as an example, we discuss the classes of tractable predictors and prediction models that are highly compatible with the existing stochastic and robust optimization tools. We further provide reformulations of the integrated models, which can be efficiently solved with the proposed branch-and-price algorithm. Moreover, we propose two simple heuristics for the multiperiod order-assignment problem, and they are built upon single-period solutions. Using the delivery data, our numerical experiments on a real-world application not only demonstrate the superior performance of our proposed order-assignment models with travel-time predictors, but also highlight the importance of learning behavioral aspects from operational data. We find that a large sample size does not necessarily compensate for the misspecification of the driver’s routing behavior. This paper was accepted by Hamid Nazerzadeh, big data analytics.
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 | 0.004 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".