Improving a multi-echelon last mile delivery system by effective solution methods based on ant colony optimization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Covid-19 pandemic has significantly impacted consumer behavior and commerce, prompting a shift towards online goods and services. The surge in demand has led to inefficiencies and disruptions, especially in the last-mile delivery (LMD) process. Because of the LMD, the final stage of the supply chain, plays a crucial role in transporting goods from businesses to consumers, challenges such as the cost inefficiencies of direct home delivery have underscored the need for innovative solutions. In this study, the collection delivery points (CDPs) approach was adopted instead of direct home delivery. It focuses on addressing these challenges by adopting service points as dynamic CDPs and handling the problem as a dynamic location routing problem (DLRP). Two solutions approaches are proposed, to select candidate depots strategically and determine efficient route configurations, to aim to minimize travel distance. One of them is a two-phased hierarchical method that starts with clustering and continues with an Ant Colony Optimization (ACO) based-hybrid algorithm, and the other one is based solely on an ACO-based hybrid algorithm. The performance of these approaches is evaluated on modified benchmark instances from the literature. It has been observed that the ACO based-hybrid algorithm is more successful in terms of total travel distance, and if an evaluation is made in terms of the number of routes, it is recommended that the results of the two-phased hierarchical method should also be considered. Furthermore, a real word case study was conducted with the proposed methods and the results were compared from different perspectives. The results corroborate the findings regarding benchmark instances, thereby providing additional validation to the results obtained.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".