MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396768746 · doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2024.05.012

A disaggregated integer L-shaped method for stochastic vehicle routing problems with monotonic recourse

2024· article· en· W4396768746 on OpenAlexafffund
Robin Legault, Jean‐François Côté, Michel Gendreau

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Operational Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVehicle Routing Optimization Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalPolytechnique Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsVehicle routing problemMonotonic functionInteger programmingInteger (computer science)Mathematical optimizationComputer scienceRouting (electronic design automation)MathematicsComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper proposes a new integer L-shaped method for solving two-stage stochastic integer programs whose first-stage solutions can decompose into disjoint components, each one having a monotonic recourse function. In a minimization problem, the monotonicity property stipulates that the recourse cost of a component must always be higher or equal to that of any of its subcomponents. The method exploits new types of optimality cuts and lower bounding functionals that are valid under this property. The stochastic vehicle routing problem is particularly well suited to be solved by this approach, as its solutions can be decomposed into a set of routes. We consider the variant with stochastic demands in which the recourse policy consists of performing a return trip to the depot whenever a vehicle does not have sufficient capacity to accommodate a newly realized customer demand. This work shows that this policy can lead to a non-monotonic recourse function, but that the monotonicity holds when the customer demands are modeled by several commonly used families of probability distributions. We also present new problem-specific lower bounds on the recourse that strengthen the lower bounding functionals and significantly speed up the solving process. Computational experiments on instances from the literature show that the new approach achieves state-of-the-art results.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.071
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.307 · 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

Citations13
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Operational ResearchSame topicVehicle Routing Optimization MethodsFrench-language works237,207