Dynamics between warehouse operations and vehicle routing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
When scheduling the distribution of ordered items from a warehouse to customers, the transportation planning is generally done first and serves as input for planning warehouse operations. Such a sequential approach can lead to substantial inefficiencies when the customer deliveries are restricted by time windows, and the warehouse has limited resources available (both order pickers and space in the staging area). This paper studies the trade‐offs between warehouse operations and transportation planning. The goal is to understand the impact of three specific managerial interventions: adopting an integrated planning approach, expanding the available staging space, and expanding the delivery time windows. To this end, we propose a mathematical model for a general vehicle routing problem that incorporates order batching, order picker scheduling, staging, and vehicle loading. We introduce a novel idea to express the picking time of an order batch as a function of the batch size and develop a metaheuristic to solve this integrated problem. Furthermore, we develop exact algorithms to provide optimal solutions for the individual warehouse and transportation problems in a sequential planning approach. Managerial insights are distilled from case studies in two warehouses, one for ambient products and the other for refrigerated products, of a leading grocery retailer in the Netherlands. Our results show that integrated planning outperforms the other managerial interventions and generates cost savings between 9% and 11%. Savings are generally realized by executing larger order batch sizes to be picked in the warehouses at the expense of additional routing cost (around 2–3%). The second intervention in the form of time window expansions of only 15 minutes for customer deliveries can lead to cost savings between 4% and 6%, which results from a reduction in both transportation and warehousing cost. Expanding the capacity of the staging area is only meaningful when the staging space is highly utilized and only results in cost savings for the warehouse operations.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".