Deep Learning for Data-Driven Districting-and-Routing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Districting-and-routing is a strategic problem aiming to aggregate basic geographical units (e.g., zip codes) into delivery districts. Its goal is to minimize the expected long-term routing cost of performing deliveries in each district separately. Solving this stochastic problem poses critical challenges since repeatedly evaluating routing costs on a set of scenarios while searching for optimal districts takes considerable time. Consequently, solution approaches usually replace the true cost estimation with continuous cost approximation formulas extending Beardwood-Halton-Hammersley and Daganzo's work. These formulas commit errors that can be magnified during the optimization step. To reconcile speed and solution quality, we introduce a supervised learning and optimization methodology leveraging a graph neural network for delivery-cost estimation. This network is trained to imitate known costs generated on a limited subset of training districts. It is used within an iterated local search procedure to produce high-quality districting plans. Our computational experiments, conducted on five metropolitan areas in the United Kingdom, demonstrate that the graph neural network predicts long-term district cost operations more accurately, and that optimizing over this oracle permits large economic gains (10.12% on average) over baseline methods that use continuous approximation formulas or shallow neural networks. Finally, we observe that having compact districts alone does not guarantee high-quality solutions and that other learnable geometrical features of the districts play an essential role.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".