MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Goal Programming and Monte Carlo Simulation for Optimizing Inbound Scheduling in Resource-Constrained Warehouses

2025· article· id· W7117662164 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJurnal Optimasi Sistem Industri · 2025
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldEngineering
TopicVehicle Routing Optimization Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersUniversitas Kristen Petra
KeywordsScheduling (production processes)Robustness (evolution)Key (lock)Monte Carlo methodTruckPrioritizationFIFO (computing and electronics)Material handling

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Resource efficiency lies at the heart of logistics performance, with unloading operations in storage facilities serving as a critical determinant of overall productivity. In less developed regions, the widespread reliance on basic rules-based systems such as FIFO often proves inadequate for handling operational complexities, leading to bottlenecks and inefficiencies. Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), constrained by limited resources, are compelled to optimize existing infrastructure rather than invest in costly upgrades. To address this challenge, the present study introduces a goal-oriented programming model designed to assign trucks to loading docks within specific time slots, thereby enhancing time efficiency. The model evaluates performance across four key metrics: waiting time, loading time, overtime, and equity. By leveraging goal programming, numerical prioritization of these objectives becomes possible, enabling flexible adjustments to meet operational needs. Furthermore, Monte Carlo simulation (MCS) is employed to incorporate variability into the dataset and assess model robustness under real-world uncertainty. Experimental results reveal that the proposed approach consistently outperforms traditional systems, delivering significant improvements in time efficiency. These findings highlight the potential of goal programming as a practical solution for planning in resource-constrained environments. The resulting model offers an adaptive, reliable framework that warehouse managers can implement without incurring substantial infrastructure costs.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.155
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.274 · 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