The Fragility-Constrained Vehicle Routing Problem with Time Windows
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We study a new variant of the well-studied vehicle routing problem with time windows (VRPTW), called the fragility-constrained VRPTW, which assumes that (1) the capacity of a vehicle is organized in multiple identical stacks; (2) all items picked up at a customer are either “fragile” or not; (3) no nonfragile items can be put on top of a fragile item (the fragility constraint); and (4) no en route load rearrangement is possible. We first characterize the feasibility of a route with respect to this fragility constraint. Then, to solve this new problem, we develop an exact branch-price-and-cut (BPC) algorithm that includes a labeling algorithm exploiting this feasibility characterization to efficiently generate feasible routes. This algorithm is benchmarked against another BPC algorithm that deals with the fragility constraint in the column generation master problem through infeasible path cuts. Our computational results show that the former BPC algorithm clearly outperforms the latter in terms of computational time and that the fragility constraint has a greater impact on the optimal solution cost (compared with that of the VRPTW) when vehicle capacity decreases, stack height increases, and for a more balanced mix of customers with fragile and nonfragile items. Funding: This work was supported by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada [Grants RGPIN 2015-06289 and RGPIN 2022-03916]. Supplemental Material: The online appendices are available at https://doi.org/10.1287/trsc.2022.1168 .
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it