MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4290724452 · doi:10.1080/03155986.2022.2106713

Optimizing the number of deployed yard cranes in a container terminal

2022· article· en· W4290724452 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Amir Gharehgozli, Nima Zaerpour, Kunpeng Li

Bibliographic record

VenueINFOR Information Systems and Operational Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMaritime Ports and Logistics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContainer (type theory)Terminal (telecommunication)YardThroughputWorkloadComputer sciencePort (circuit theory)Operations researchSupply chainIdleComputer networkEngineeringTelecommunicationsOperating systemBusinessElectrical engineeringWireless

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Container terminals play an essential role in the current global supply chain, and their efficiency influences businesses throughout the supply chain. One of the most critical decisions in the operation of container terminals is the number of deployed rubber tyred gantry (RTG) cranes to handle the containers. The RTG crane is the main equipment that handles containers in the stacking area of many container terminals worldwide. Every shift, container terminal operators decide how many RTG cranes are needed to stack and retrieve containers. This decision, if made optimally, can significantly improve the daily throughput of terminals and dramatically reduce port congestion. This article aims to determine the optimal number of RTG cranes in a container terminal by formulating the problem as a mixed-integer linear program. Our proposed formulation can find optimal solutions efficiently, usually in less than a second. The results show that the workload, storage capacity, and shift duration significantly influence the optimal number of RTG cranes.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.294
Threshold uncertainty score0.178

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueINFOR Information Systems and Operational ResearchSame topicMaritime Ports and LogisticsFrench-language works237,207