The Intermodal Railroad Blocking and Railcar Fleet-Management Planning Problem
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rail is a cost-effective and relatively low-emission mode for transporting intermodal containers over long distances. This paper addresses tactical planning of intermodal railroad operations by introducing a new problem that simultaneously considers three consolidation processes and the management of a heterogeneous railcar fleet. We model the problem with a scheduled service network design with resource management (SSND-RM) formulation, expressed as an integer linear program. While such formulations are challenging to solve at scale, we demonstrate that our problem can be tackled with a general-purpose solver when provided with high-quality warm-start solutions. To this end, we design a construction heuristic inspired by a relax-and-fix procedure. We evaluate the methodology on realistic, large-scale instances from our industrial partner, the Canadian National Railway Company: a North American Class I railroad. The computational experiments show that the proposed approach efficiently solves practically relevant instances, and that solutions to the SSND-RM formulation yield substantially more accurate capacity estimations compared to those obtained from simpler baseline models. Managerial insights from our study highlight that ignoring railcar fleet management or container loading constraints can lead to a severe underestimation of required capacity, which may result in costly operational inefficiencies. Furthermore, our results show that the use of multi-platform railcars improves overall capacity utilization and benefits the network, even if they can locally lead to less efficient loading as measured by terminal-level slot utilization performance indicators.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".