MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3137046107 · doi:10.1155/2021/6650097

An Optimization Model for Tramp Ship Scheduling considering Time Window and Seaport Operation Delay Factors

2021· article· en· W3137046107 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ang Yang, Yu Cao, Kang Chen, Qingcheng Zeng, Zigen Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMaritime Transport Emissions and Efficiency
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesDepartment of Science and Technology of Liaoning Province
KeywordsScheduling (production processes)TrampComputer sciencePort (circuit theory)Mathematical optimizationFuel efficiencyThermal power stationEngineeringAutomotive engineeringWaste managementElectrical engineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The quantity of electrical coal transported through the tramp shipping network is increasing due to the high demands. This trend has increased the scheduling difficulty combined with the underdevelopment of the private thermal power plant port. The high coal consumption and low port storage capacity requires the scheduling of the tramp ship to be on a strict time window to ensure the continuous operation of the thermal power plant. The low port unloading capacity often leads to the port congestion and delay of the unloading operation. This paper develops a mixed-integer-programming model for the optimization of the tramp ship scheduling to reduce the total operation cost, including the transportation cost and the unloading waiting cost, and the branch-and-price algorithm is adopted to solve this large-scale model. The model and algorithm are tested with historical operation data from the thermal power plant in the southern coastal areas of China. The optimized scheme significantly reduces the total operation cost by reducing the unloading waiting time and the number of active vessels in certain periods. The results also demonstrate the algorithm improvement in the aspects of the optimization quality and efficiency comparing with the heuristic solution.

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 score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.072

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicMaritime Transport Emissions and EfficiencyFrench-language works237,207