Table 2.
Problems Classification and characteristics of GVRP publications.
| Reference | Year | Class | Fleet mix | Objective Function | Constraints | Mathematical model | Solution Approach |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Exact | Heuristic | Metaheuristic | |||||||
| [24] | 2012 | Time window | HO | C | Cap, TW, MTT | ✓ | |||
| [42] | 2014 | Flexible fleet size | HO | D | Cap | ✓ | ✓ | ||
| [23] | 2014 | Flexible fleet size | HO | C | Cap | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |
| [39] | 2015 | Stochastic | HO | D | Cap | ✓ | ✓ | ||
| [40] | 2016 | Stochastic | C | C, ResC | Cap | ✓ | ✓ | ||
| [28] | 2017 | Time window | HO | TC | Cap, TW, MTT | ✓ | ✓ | ||
| [29] | 2017 | Time window | HO | TC | Cap, TW, MTT | ✓ | ✓ | ||
| [38] | 2018 | Multi-level | HO | TC, HC, CC | Cap, MTT | ✓ | ✓ | ||
| [41] | 2018 | Stochastic | HO | TC, ResC | Cap | ✓ | |||
| [27] | 2018 | Pickup and delivery, Time window | HO | TC, CD | Cap, TW | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |
| [36] | 2019 | Split delivery | HO | D | Cap | ✓ | ✓ | ||
| [30] | 2019 | Time window, Stochastic | HO | TC, RecC | Cap, TW, MTT | ✓ | ✓ | ||
| [25] | 2019 | Pickup and delivery, Time window | HO | Du | Cap, TW | ✓ | ✓ | ||
| [26] | 2019 | Time window | Du | TW | ✓ | ||||
| [32] | 2019 | Time window | HO | TC | Cap, CCap, TW, MTT | ✓ | |||
| [31] | 2020 | Time window, Stochastic | HO | Du, RecC | Cap, TW | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |
| [33] | 2021 | Time window | HO | TC | Cap, CCap, TW, SL | ✓ | ✓ | ||
| [34] | 2022 | Time window | HO | D | Cap, TW, Ch | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |
Objectives [TC: Traveling Cost, D: Distance, Du: Duration, HC: Handling Cost, ResC: Restocking cost, RecC: Recourse Cost, GTC: Ground Transportation Cost, MTC: Maritime Transportation Cost, CD: Customer Dissatisfaction, P: Penalty for parcels not delivered, VFC: Vehicle Fixed Cost, CC: Connection Cost, Battery charge constraint].
Constraints [Cap: Capacity, CCap: Customer Capacity, TW: Time Windows, MTT: Maximum Travel Time, SL: Satisfaction Level, Ch: Charging constraint].
Fleet Mix [HO: Homogeneous].