Two-stage stochastic programming for the inventory routing problem with stochastic demands in fuel delivery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The inventory routing problem (IRP) arises in the joint practices of vendor-managed inventory (VMI) and vehicle routing problem (VRP), aiming to simultaneously optimize the distribution, inventory and vehicle routes. This paper studies the multi-vehicle multi-compartment inventory routing problem with stochastic demands (MCIRPSD) in the context of fuel delivery. The problem with maximum-to-level (ML) replenishment policy is modeled as a two-stage stochastic programming model with the purpose of minimizing the total cost, in which the inventory management and routing decisions are made in the first stage while the corresponding resource actions are implemented in the second stage. An acceleration strategy is incorporated into the exact single-cut Benders decomposition algorithm and its multi-cut version respectively to solve the MCIRPSD on the small instances. Two-phase heuristic approaches based on the single-cut decomposition algorithm and its multi-cut version are developed to deal with the MCIRPSD on the medium and large-scale instances. Comparing the performance of the proposed algorithms with the Gurobi solver within limited time, the average objective value obtained by the proposed algorithm has decreased more than 7.30% for the medium and large instances, which demonstrates the effectiveness of our algorithms. The impacts of the instance features on the results are further analyzed, and some managerial insights are concluded for the manager.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".