MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4360592163 · doi:10.5267/j.dsl.2022.11.004

Design of a hybridization between Tabu search and PAES algorithms to solve a multi-depot, multi-product green vehicle routing problem

2023· article· en· W4360592163 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Juan Sebastián Azuero-Ortiz, María Alejandr Gaviria-Hernández, Vicky Magnolia Jiménez-Rodríguez, Edgar José Vale-Santiago, Eliana María González-Neira

Bibliographic record

VenueDecision Science Letters · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVehicle Routing Optimization Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTabu searchMetaheuristicMathematical optimizationVehicle routing problemPareto principleComputer scienceGenetic algorithmAlgorithmHeuristicRouting (electronic design automation)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vehicle routing problem (VRP) is a classic problem studied in logistic. One of the most important variations within this problem is called Green Vehicle Routing Problem (GVRP), in which environmental aspects are considered when designing product delivery routes. This variant arises due to the high levels of pollution produced by transport vehicles, so it is a variation whose study represents a vital impact nowadays. This project will consider a GVRP and will be developed considering the characteristics of multi-depot (MDVRP) and multi-product (MPVRP) to minimize the costs of assignation of vehicles and CO2 emissions. To solve the problem, this project proposes a hybridization between the classic tabu search (TS) metaheuristic and the PAES algorithm (TS+PAES) to generate the Pareto frontier of both objectives. An integer mixed linear programming model is formulated and developed for each objective function separately to have an optimal point of comparison for the efficiency of the proposed algorithm. Also, the TS+PAES algorithm is compared to the nearest neighbor algorithm for large instances. Two computational experiments were carried out, one for small and the other one for large instances. The experiment for small instances showed that the GAP of each extreme of the frontier compared to the MILP model is on average 0.73%. For large instances, the metaheuristic improves in 0.1% the results presented by the MILP model showing that the metaheuristic provides closer near-optimal solutions in less computational time. Besides, the metaheuristic, in comparison with the nearest neighborhood heuristic, improves in 44.21% the results of emissions and in 3.88% the costs. All these results demonstrate the effectiveness of the metaheuristic.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDecision Science LettersSame topicVehicle Routing Optimization MethodsFrench-language works237,207