4.7 Article

Vehicle routing optimization for hazmat shipments considering catastrophe avoidance and failed edges

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.tre.2021.102337

关键词

Vehicle routing; Hazmat shipments; Catastrophe avoidance; Failed edges; 2-stage decision-making

资金

  1. Key Project of National Natural Science Foundation of China [71732006]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [71572138, 71371150, 71390331, 71871176]
  3. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2020M683519]
  4. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [SK2020031]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This research presents a bi-objective vehicle routing optimization model for hazmat shipments considering catastrophe avoidance and failed edges. It introduces a 2-stage decision-making process with two different strategies developed for dealing with failed edges after incidents. Both strategies are compared using mathematical analysis, with numerical results reported and managerial insights provided through sensitivity analysis.
This research is a bi-objective vehicle routing optimization for hazmat shipments considering catastrophe avoidance and failed edges. The risk is defined as load dependent incident consequence, and the maximum risk is minimized based on the principle of catastrophe avoidance. A 2-stage decision-making is proposed to deal with the failed edges after incidents, and two different strategies are discussed. In each strategy, a bi-objective vehicle routing model is developed to decide the initial vehicle routing plan in the first decision-making stage, and a path selection model is developed to decide the paths of substitute vehicles in order to complete the unfinished deliveries of incident vehicles in the second decision-making stage. The exact algorithms and approximation algorithms are developed for both strategies. Whereafter, the two strategies are compared by mathematical analysis. Finally, numerical results are reported and the sensitivity analysis provides several managerial insights.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据