Hub Network Design Problem with Capacity, Congestion, and Stochastic Demand Considerations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our study introduces the hub network design problem with congestion, capacity, and stochastic demand considerations (HNDC), which generalizes the classical hub location problem in several directions. In particular, we extend state-of-the-art by integrating capacity acquisition decisions and congestion cost effect into the problem and allowing dynamic routing for origin-destination (OD) pairs. Connecting strategic and operational level decisions, HNDC jointly decides hub locations and capacity acquisitions by considering the expected routing and congestion costs. A path-based mixed-integer second-order cone programming (SOCP) formulation of the HNDC is proposed. We exploit SOCP duality results and propose an exact algorithm based on Benders decomposition and column generation to solve this challenging problem. We use a specific characterization of the capacity-feasible solutions to speed up the solution procedure and develop an efficient branch-and-cut algorithm to solve the master problem. We conduct extensive computational experiments to test the proposed approach’s performance and derive managerial insights based on realistic problem instances adapted from the literature. In particular, we found that including hub congestion costs, accounting for the uncertainty in demand, and whether the underlying network is complete or incomplete have a significant impact on hub network design and the resulting performance of the system. Funding: This work was supported by Türkiye Bilimsel ve Teknolojik Araştırma Kurumu [Grant 218M520]. Supplemental Material: The online appendices are available at https://doi.org/10.1287/trsc.2022.0112 .
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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".