MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386588266 · doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2023.09.003

Capacity planning with uncertainty on contract fulfillment

2023· article· en· W4386588266 on OpenAlexaff
Teodor Gabriel Crainic, Guido Perboli, Walter Rei, Mariangela Rosano, Veronica Lerma

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Operational Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUrban and Freight Transport Logistics
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCapacity planningComputer scienceCapacity managementOperations researchSpace (punctuation)Set (abstract data type)Variable (mathematics)Capacity optimizationMetaheuristicBusinessEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper focuses on the tactical planning problem faced by a shipper which seeks to secure transportation and warehousing capacity, such as containers, vehicles or space in a warehouse, of different sizes, costs, and characteristics, from a carrier or logistics provider, while facing different sources of uncertainty. The uncertainty can be related to the loads to be transported or stored, the cost and availability of ad-hoc capacity on the spot market in the future, and the availability of the contracted capacity in the future when the shipper needs it. This last source of uncertainty on the capacity loss on the contracted capacity is particularly important in both long-haul transportation and urban distribution applications, but no optimization methodology has been proposed so far. We introduce the Stochastic Variable Cost and Size Bin Packing with Capacity Loss problem and model that directly address this issue, together with a metaheuristic to efficiently address it. We perform a set of extensive numerical experiments on instances related to long-haul transportation and urban distribution contexts and derive managerial insights on how such capacity planning should be performed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.822
Threshold uncertainty score0.255

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.187
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.132 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Operational ResearchSame topicUrban and Freight Transport LogisticsFrench-language works237,207