MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408896392 · doi:10.18280/jesa.580201

A Hybrid Memetic and Set Partitioning Optimization Framework for Decision Support in Industrial Transportation: A Case Study of Employee Shuttle Routing

2025· article· en· W4408896392 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hajar Bideq, Khaoula Ouaddi, Rachid Ellaia

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal Européen des Systèmes Automatisés · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Manufacturing and Logistics Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMemetic algorithmVehicle routing problemSet (abstract data type)Routing (electronic design automation)Computer scienceOperations researchMathematical optimizationLocal search (optimization)EngineeringArtificial intelligenceMathematicsComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Designing cost-effective shuttle services for large-scale industrial companies presents a significant challenge in the transportation industry.This challenge arises from the need to balance high-quality service with cost-effectiveness while considering various practical constraints.In this context, we introduce a novel approach to help decision-makers address Employee Shuttle Bus Routing Problems (ESBRP).Our method combines the Memetic Algorithm (MA), a metaheuristic, with the Set Partitioning Problem (SPP) model, an exact algorithm.The proposed framework consists of two phases: (1) generating routes that adhere to the real-world constraints of the ESBRP using the MA, and (2) allocating these routes to a heterogeneous fleet of vehicles by optimally solving the SPP Model.A unique feature of our approach is the extension of the framework to enable the transition from addressing the single-load scenario of the ESBRP problem to solving the mixed-load scenario.This transition is achieved by implementing the Single to Mixed Loads Heuristic (SMH).This paper presents the results of thorough computational tests conducted on multiple data instances of varying sizes.Additionally, we develop a mixed-integer programming (MIP) model for the ESBRP to compare and evaluate the results of the proposed framework.By assessing solution quality and execution times on small and moderate-sized data instances, the experiments demonstrate that the proposed approach is efficient and often generates near-optimal solutions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.421
Threshold uncertainty score0.612

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal Européen des Systèmes AutomatisésSame topicAdvanced Manufacturing and Logistics OptimizationFrench-language works237,207