MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392363553 · doi:10.1016/j.trc.2024.104529

Adaptive robust electric vehicle routing under energy consumption uncertainty

2024· article· en· W4392363553 on OpenAlexafffund
Jaehee Jeong, Bissan Ghaddar, Nicolas Zufferey, Jatin Nathwani

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Part C Emerging Technologies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Vehicles and Infrastructure
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEnergy consumptionElectric vehicleVehicle routing problemConsumption (sociology)Computer scienceAutomotive engineeringRouting (electronic design automation)EngineeringTransport engineeringComputer networkElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Electric vehicles (EVs) have been highly favoured as a mode of transportation in recent years. EVs offer numerous benefits over traditional fuel-based vehicles, particularly in terms of the environmental impact. Although electric vehicles offer several advantages, there are certain restrictions that limit their usage. One of the significant issues is the uncertainty in their driving range. The driving range of EVs is closely related to their energy consumption, which is highly affected by exogenous and endogenous factors. Since those factors are unpredictable, uncertainty in EVs’ energy consumption should be considered for efficient operation. This paper proposes a two-stage adaptive robust optimization framework for the electric vehicle routing problem. The objective is to minimize the worst-case energy consumption while guaranteeing that services are delivered at the appointed time windows without battery level deficiency. We postulate that EVs can be recharged on route, and the charging amount can be adjusted depending on the circumstances. A column-and-constraint generation based heuristic algorithm, which is coupled with variable neighbourhood search and alternating direction algorithm, is proposed to solve the resulting model. The computational results show the economic efficiency and robustness of the proposed model, and that there is a tradeoff between the total required energy and the risk of failing to satisfy all customers’ demand.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations32
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation Research Part C Emerging TechnologiesSame topicElectric Vehicles and InfrastructureFrench-language works237,207