The synchronized multi-commodity multi-service Transshipment-Hub Location Problem with cyclic schedules
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The synchronized multi-commodity multi-service Transshipment-Hub Location Problem is a hub location problem variant faced by a logistics service provider operating in the context of synchromodal logistics. The provider must decide where and when to locate transshipment facilities in order to manage many customers’ origin–destination shipments with release and due dates while minimizing a total cost given by location costs, transportation costs, and penalties related to unmet time constraints. The considered synchromodal network involves different transportation modes (e.g., truck, rail, river and sea navigation) to perform long-haul shipments and the freight synchronization at facilities for transshipment operations. To the best of our knowledge, this variant has never been studied before. Considering a time horizon in which both transportation services and demand follow a cyclic pattern, we propose a time-space network representation of the problem and an ad-hoc embedding of the time-dependent parameters into the network topology and the arcs’ weight. This allows to model the flow synchronization required by the problem through a Mixed-Integer Linear Programming formulation with a simplified structure, similar to well-known hub location problems and avoiding complicating constraints for managing the time dimension. Through an extensive experimental campaign conducted over a large set of realistic instances, we present a computational and an economic analysis. In particular, we want to assess the potential benefits of implementing synchromodal logistics operations into long-haul supply-chains managed by large service providers. Since flexibility is one of the main features of synchromodality, we evaluate the impact on decisions and costs of different levels of flexibility regarding terminals’ operations and customers’ requirements.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
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".