Jump to content

Talk:Vehicle routing problem

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

How come the Clarke & Wright savings heuristic not being mentioned anywhere on the English Wikipedia? Was quite hard finding this page. --Blackstab-- (talk) 15:31, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't this problem the same as the Job-shop problem, with machines being vehicles and jobs being customers?--130.115.76.138 19:40, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not true. I've added a section for this (with references).Jiuguang Wang (talk) 17:20, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The ``Why is it hard? section seems silly to me. That is, it occupies about 40% of the article and it really is just a basic tutorial on combinatorial explosion. Surely there are more interesting facets of vehicle routing that can be discussed instead of this filler. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.97.166.49 (talk) 19:31, 20 June 2013 (UTC) [reply]

I agree. Deleted. AustinBuchanan (talk) 00:44, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why is it hard part, is the most useful part of this wiki, since regular people like me with a standard academic background including operations research try to approach the problem the "simplex" way, since the problem itself doesnt look like NP-Hard. Deleting is not the way to go, adding more content could be in my opinion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.46.135.130 (talk) 11:13, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Vehicle flow formulations

I think the notation needs to be explained in the vehicle flow formulation section. Cij is the cost of going from node i to node j, Xij is a boolean that is 1 if the edge ij is part of the solution and 0 otherwise. Node 0 is the depot node, K is the number of vehicles. All this needs to be explained. 118.211.63.81 (talk) 01:49, 12 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

good point feel free to add. Lady-shirakawa (talk) 09:37, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Did anyone check the source for the MTZ constraints? Because (a) the explanation is a bit confusing and (b) the two constraints reflect opposite intuitions: in the first u grows (reflecting additional free capacity during a delivery), but in the second, it is restricted by the demand of a customer, which somehow contradicts the constraint before. Also, there are no restrictions coming from/going to the depot node. So either it is more than just a bit unclear, or it is plainly wrong.

84.138.65.139 (talk) 07:37, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't have the referenced paper but I 'm convinced too there is a typo. The additionnal constraints should read :
(**) u_i - u_j >= d_j - C(1 - x_{ij})
and not :
(*) u_j - u_i >= d_j - C(1 - x_{ij})
Bruno P. 193.50.40.239 (talk) 15:43, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]