Trends and new practical applications for warehouse allocation and layout design: a literature review
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Companies’ productivity is critical in contemporary warehouse environment to maintain efficiency and competitiveness within their supply chain. Warehousing operations are well known for their impact on the overall supply chain and need to be wisely managed. Among those activities, allocation planning and layout design are some of the most important concepts in practice. Current research tends to emphasize homogeneous environment, which leaves heterogeneous and non-standard cases with less attention, even today. This paper aims to review the literature regarding warehouse allocation planning and layout design methods that could suit practical industry problems, with a focus on heterogeneous and non-standard spare parts. It also aims to describe the current trends in these fields. Following a literature review methodology, a total of fifty-seven articles were reviewed to identify the methods developed and used. The reviewed papers were also investigated in order to identify research gaps and future directions. The analysis concluded that more research is needed to better understand and optimize heterogeneous and non-standard spare parts environments in terms of allocation and layout design. More practical case applications also remain a gap to address. Article highlights This article evaluates 8 concepts/parameters related to warehouse allocation operation. This is to ensure a deep analysis of heterogeneous and non-standard parts presence in literature. A research gap is identified regarding heterogeneous and non-standard parts in warehouse allocation and layout design methods in the scientific literature. This article evaluates 3798 scientific papers over a 20-year timeframe. From this, we present 57 methods and 8 gaps in scientific literature.
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it