Deploying pickers and robots in cobot-based collaborative order picking systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As a promising application of cobots in labor-intensive warehouses, human-robot collaborative order picking systems provide a flexible and human-friendly picking solution by capitalizing on the best attributes of human pickers and robots. Few studies have determined operation modes of human-robot collaborative order picking systems to be beneficial to efficiency, cost, and the well-being of human workers. We identify four human-robot collaborative modes for order picking: single robot to single picker (Couple), single robot to multiple pickers (SR-to-MP), single picker to multiple robots (SP-to-MR), and multiple pickers to multiple robots (MP-to-MR). For each mode, we establish a fork-join queueing network model to analyze system performance and apply a fatigue-recovery model to estimate the fatigue of the pickers. The proposed fork-join queueing network model and fatigue-recovery model are validated by simulation. Although the throughput time and picker fatigue in the SR-to-MP mode can benefit from an appropriate zoning policy, we find, interestingly, that the zoning policy cannot reduce the throughput time in the SP-to-MR mode. The SP-to-MR mode is economical if a warehouse does not pursue a swift throughput time. A well-capitalized warehouse can adopt the SR-to-MP mode to improve the throughput time further in a more human-friendly manner.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".