MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415119840 · doi:10.18280/jesa.580818

Enhanced Particle Swarm Optimization for Dual-Constraint Multi-Knapsack Problems: A Real-World Retail Packaging Application

2025· article· en· W4415119840 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ifan Rizqa, Abdul Syukur, Nova Rijati, Aris Marjuni

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal Européen des Systèmes Automatisés · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptimization and Packing Problems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParticle swarm optimizationMeasure (data warehouse)Work (physics)Feature (linguistics)Particle (ecology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Multi-Constraint Multi-Knapsack Parcel Optimization Problem (MCMKPOP) arises in retail logistics where products must be allocated to multiple packages under simultaneous weight and budget constraints.Conventional methods, including exact approaches and traditional metaheuristics, often address these constraints separately or rely on synthetic datasets, scalability and practical relevance.This study proposes an enhanced Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) framework that introduces three key innovations: an assignment-based representation to encode discrete allocations, a repairbased constraint mechanism to ensure feasibility, and a hybrid value function that integrates price, weight, and efficiency trade-offs.Using a real-world dataset of 213 retail items and ten heterogeneous packaging configurations, the proposed approach was evaluated against Genetic Algorithm, Simulated Annealing, and Random Search.Experimental results from 30 independent runs show that PSO achieves 100% of the theoretical upper bound with a mean performance of 21.3083 ± 0.3145, balanced resource utilization (> 90%), and zero constraint violations.Statistical validation through parametric and non-parametric tests confirmed the robustness and significance of these findings.The novelty this work unified treatment of dual constraints, a multi-knapsackaware upper bound, and validation on real-world data, establishing PSO as both a methodological advance and a practical solution for intelligent retail packaging optimization.

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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueJournal Européen des Systèmes AutomatisésSame topicOptimization and Packing ProblemsFrench-language works237,207