MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415395950 · doi:10.1016/j.trb.2025.103335

A dynamic drone routing problem with uncertain demand and energy consumption

2025· article· en· W4415395950 on OpenAlexafffund
Guilherme Oliveira Chagas, Leandro C. Coelho, Demetrio Laganà, Patrizia Beraldi

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Part B Methodological · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUAV Applications and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMinistero dello Sviluppo Economico
KeywordsDroneEnergy consumptionRouting (electronic design automation)Consumption (sociology)Energy (signal processing)Dynamic programmingVehicle routing problem

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work addresses a drone routing problem with an identical fleet performing same-day deliveries in a dynamic and uncertain environment. We model the problem as a Markov Decision Process to capture the stochastic nature of customer demand and the uncertainty in energy consumption due to varying payloads and weather conditions. To tackle this problem, we propose an approximate dynamic algorithm that integrates routing planning, drone usage, and battery management. Uncertainty in energy consumption is dealt with the chance constraints ensuring that drone trips are completed safely, preventing premature returns to the depot. The proposed approach features a cost function approximation policy that accounts for a restricted number of trips to be assigned to drones. This ensures that the drones are ready at the depot to fulfill new requests that may arise during the day. Extensive computational experiments on 300 instances validate the effectiveness of our method, demonstrating its superiority over a myopic strategy, a policy function approximation approach, and an oracle method, thus highlighting its potential for practical applications.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.147
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.259 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation Research Part B MethodologicalSame topicUAV Applications and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207