MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4376456745 · doi:10.1109/tits.2023.3271430

Logistics in the Sky: A Two-Phase Optimization Approach for the Drone Package Pickup and Delivery System

2023· article· en· W4376456745 on OpenAlexaff
Fangyu Hong, Guohua Wu, Qizhang Luo, Huan Liu, Witold Pedrycz

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVehicle Routing Optimization Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersChina Scholarship CouncilNatural Science Foundation for Distinguished Young Scholars of Hunan ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsDroneNotationPickupSimulated annealingComputer scienceMathematicsAlgorithmArtificial intelligenceArithmetic

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The application of drones in last-mile distribution has been a contentious research topic in recent years. Existing urban distribution modes mostly depend on trucks. This paper proposes a novel package pickup and delivery mode and system wherein multiple drones collaborate with automatic devices. The proposed mode uses free areas on top of residential buildings to set automatic devices as delivery and pickup points of packages, and employs drones to transport packages between buildings and depots. The integrated scheduling problem of package drop-pickup considering${m}$-drones,${m}$-depots, and${m}$-customers is crucial for the system. Therefore, we propose a simulated-annealing-based two-phase optimization (SATO) approach to solve this problem. In the first phase, tasks are allocated to depots for serving, such that the initial problem is decomposed into multiple single-depot scheduling problems with${m}$-drone. In the second phase, considering the drone capability and task demand constraints, we generated a route-planning scheme for drones in each depot. Concurrently, an improved variable neighborhood descent (IVND) algorithm was designed in the first phase to reallocate tasks, and a local search (LS) algorithm was proposed to search for high-quality solutions in the second phase. Finally, extensive experiments and comparative studies were conducted to verify the effectiveness of the proposed approach.

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)0.001
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations54
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation SystemsSame topicVehicle Routing Optimization MethodsFrench-language works237,207