Optimization Models for the Vehicle Routing Problem under Disruptions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we study the role of disruptions in the multi-period vehicle routing problem (VRP), which naturally arises in humanitarian logistics and military applications. We assume that at any time during the delivery phase, each vehicle could have chance to be disrupted. When a disruption happens, vehicles will be unable to continue their journeys and supplies will be unable to be delivered. We model the occurrence of disruption as a given probability and consider the multi-period expected delivery. Our objective is to either minimize the total travel cost or maximize the demand fulfillment, depending on the supply quantity. This problem is denoted as the multi-period vehicle routing problem with disruption (VRPMD). VRPMD does not deal with disruptions in real-time and is more focused on the long-term performance of a single routing plan. We first prove that the proposed VRPMD problems are NP-hard. We then present some analytical properties related to the optimal solutions to these problems. We show that Dror and Trudeau’s property does not apply in our problem setting. Nevertheless, a generalization of Dror and Trudeau’s property holds. Finally, we present efficient heuristic algorithms to solve these problems and show the effectiveness of the proposed models and algorithms through numerical studies.
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".