Optimal Order Batching in Warehouse Management: A Data-Driven Robust Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Optimizing warehouse processes has direct impact on supply chain responsiveness, timely order fulfillment, and customer satisfaction. In this work, we focus on the picking process in warehouse management and study it from a data perspective. Using historical data from an industrial partner, we introduce, model, and study the robust order batching problem (ROBP) that groups orders into batches to minimize total order processing time accounting for uncertainty caused by system congestion and human behavior. We provide a generalizable, data-driven approach that overcomes warehouse-specific assumptions characterizing most of the work in the literature. We analyze historical data to understand the processes in the warehouse, to predict processing times, and to improve order processing. We introduce the ROBP and develop an efficient learning-based branch-and-price algorithm based on simultaneous column and row generation, embedded with alternative prediction models such as linear regression and random forest that predict processing time of a batch. We conduct extensive computational experiments to test the performance of the proposed approach and to derive managerial insights based on real data. The data-driven prescriptive analytics tool we propose achieves savings of seven to eight minutes per order, which translates into a 14.8% increase in daily picking operations capacity of the warehouse.
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 | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".