Optimizing Task Waiting Times in Dynamic Vehicle Routing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We study the problem of deploying a fleet of mobile robots to service tasks that arrive stochastically over time and at random locations in an environment. This is known as the Dynamic Vehicle Routing Problem (DVRP) and requires robots to allocate incoming tasks among themselves and find an optimal sequence for each robot. State-of-the-art approaches only consider average wait times and focus on high-load scenarios where the arrival rate of tasks approaches the limit of what can be handled by the robots while keeping the queue of unserviced tasks bounded, i.e., stable. To ensure stability, these approaches repeatedly compute minimum distance tours over a set of newly arrived tasks. This letter is aimed at addressing the missing policies for moderate-load scenarios, where quality of service can be improved by prioritizing long-waiting tasks. We introduce a novel DVRP policy based on a cost function that takes the <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><tex-math notation="LaTeX">$p$</tex-math></inline-formula> -norm over accumulated wait times and show it guarantees stability even in high-load scenarios. We demonstrate that the proposed policy outperforms the state-of-the-art in both mean and <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><tex-math notation="LaTeX">$95{\text{th}}$</tex-math></inline-formula> percentile wait times in moderate-load scenarios through simulation experiments in the Euclidean plane as well as using real-world data for city scale service requests.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".