Chapitre 6 - VRP

C. Barnhart and G. Laporte (Eds.), Handbook in OR & MS, Vol.
14
Copyright © 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved
DOI: 10.1016/S0927-0507(06)14006-2
Chapter 6
Vehicle Routing
Jean-François Cordeau
Canada Research Chair in Logistics and Transportation, HEC Montréal,
3000 chemin de la Côte-Sainte-Catherine, Montréal, H3T 2A7, Canada
E-mail: [email protected]
Gilbert Laporte
Canada Research Chair in Distribution Management, HEC Montréal,
3000 chemin de la Côte-Sainte-Catherine, Montréal, H3T 2A7, Canada
Martin W.P. Savelsbergh

School of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology,
Atlanta, GA 30332-0205, USA
Daniele Vigo
Dipartimento di Elettronica, Informatica e Sistemistica, University of Bologna,
Viale Risorgimento 2, 40136 Bologna, Italy
1 Introduction
The vehicle routing problem lies at the heart of distribution management. It

is faced each day by thousands of companies and organizations engaged in the
delivery and collection of goods or people. Because conditions vary from one
setting to the next, the objectives and constraints encountered in practice are
highly variable. Most algorithmic research and software development in this
area focus on a limited number of prototype problems. By building enough
flexibility in optimization systems one can adapt these to various practical con-
texts.
Much progress has been made since the publication of the first article on
the “truck dispatching” problem by Dantzig and Ramser (1959). Several vari-
ants of the basic problem have been put forward. Strong formulations have
been proposed, together with polyhedral studies and exact decomposition al-
gorithms. Numerous heuristics have also been developed for vehicle routing
problems. In particular the study of this class of problems has stimulated the
emergence and the growth of several metaheuristics whose performance is
constantly improving.
This chapter focuses on some of the most important vehicle routing prob-
lem types. A number of other variants have been treated in recent articles and
367
368 J.-F. Cordeau et al.
book chapters (see, e.g., Toth and Vigo, 2002a). The pickup and delivery vehi-
cle routing problem, which has also been extensively studied, is covered in the
“Transportation on Demand” chapter.
The remainder of this chapter is organized as follows. Section 2 is devoted to
the classical vehicle routing problem (simply referred to as VRP), defined with
a single depot and only capacity and route length constraints. Problems with
time windows are surveyed in Section 3. Section 4 is devoted to inventory rout-
ing problems which combine routing and customer replenishment decisions.
Finally, Section 5 covers the field of stochastic vehicle routing in which some
of the problem data are random variables.
2 The classical vehicle routing problem
The Classical Vehicle Routing Problem (VRP) is one of the most popular
problems in combinatorial optimization, and its study has given rise to several
exact and heuristic solution techniques of general applicability. It generalizes
the Traveling Salesman Problem (TSP) and is therefore NP-hard. A recent sur-
vey of the VRP can be found in the first six chapters of the book edited by
Toth and Vigo (2002a). The aim of this section is to provide a comprehensive
overview of the available exact and heuristic algorithms for the VRP, most of
which have also been adapted to solve other variants, as will be shown in the
remaining sections.
The VRP is often defined under capacity and route length restrictions.
When only capacity constraints are present the problem is denoted as CVRP.
Most exact algorithms have been developed with capacity constraints in mind
but several apply mutatis mutandis to distance constrained problems. In con-
trast, most heuristics explicitly consider both types of constraint.
2.1 Formulations
The symmetric VRP is defined on a complete undirected graph G = (V E).

The set V = {0 n} is a vertex set. Each vertex i ∈ V \{0} represents a cus-
tomer having a nonnegative demand qi , while vertex 0 corresponds to a depot.
To each edge e ∈ E = {(i j): i j ∈ V i < j} is associated a travel cost ce
or cij . A fixed fleet of m identical vehicles, each of capacity Q, is available at
the depot. The symmetric VRP calls for the determination of a set of m routes
whose total travel cost is minimized and such that: (1) each customer is vis-
ited exactly once by one route, (2) each route starts and ends at the depot,
(3) the total demand of the customers served by a route does not exceed the
vehicle capacity Q, and (4) the length of each route does not exceed a pre-
set limit L. (It is common to assume constant speed so that distances, travel
times and travel costs are considered as synonymous.) A solution can be viewed
as a set of m cycles sharing a common vertex at the depot. The asymmetric
VRP is similarly defined on a directed graph G = (V A), where A = {(i j):
Ch. 6. Vehicle Routing 369
i j ∈ V i = j} is an arc set. In this case a circuit (directed cycle) is associated

with a vehicle route. Most results of Sections 2.1 and 2.2 apply to the symmetric
CVRP.
An integer linear programming formulation of the CVRP follows, where
for each edge e ∈ E the integer variable xe indicates the number of times
edge e is traversed in the solution. Let r(S) denote the minimum number of
vehicles needed to serve the customers of a subset S of customers. The value of
r(S) may be determined by solving an associated Bin Packing Problem (BPP)
with item set S and bins of capacity Q. Finally, for S ⊂ V , let δ(S) = {(i j):
i ∈ S j ∈ / S or i ∈ / S j ∈ S}. If S = {i}, then we simply write δ(i) instead
of δ({i}). The CVRP formulation proposed by Laporte et al. (1985) is then:

(CVRP1) minimize ce xe (1)
e∈E
subject to

xe = 2 i ∈ V \ {0} (2)
e∈δ(i)

xe = 2m (3)
e∈δ(0)

xe 2r(S) S ⊆ V \ {0} S = ∅ (4)
e∈δ(S)
xe ∈ {0 1} e∈
/ δ(0) (5)
xe ∈ {0 1 2} e ∈ δ(0) (6)
The degree constraints (2) state that each customer is visited exactly once,
whereas the depot degree constraint (3) means that m routes are created.
Capacity constraints (4) impose both the connectivity of the solution and the
vehicle capacity requirements by forcing a sufficient number of edges to enter
each subset of vertices. We note that since the BPP is NP-hard in the strong
r(S) may be approximated from below by any BPP lower bound, such as
sense,
i∈S qi /Q. Finally, constraints (5) and (6) impose that each edge between
two customers is traversed at most once and each edge incident to the depot is
traversed at most twice. In this latter case, the vehicle performs a route visiting
a single customer.
A widely used alternative formulation is based on the set partitioning or
set covering models. The formulation was originally proposed by Balinski and
Quandt (1964) and contains a potentially exponential number of binary vari-
ables. Let R = {R1 Rs } denote the collection of all feasible routes, with
s = |R|. Each route Rj has an associated cost γj , and aij is a binary coefficient
equal to 1 if and only if vertex i is visited (i.e., covered) by route Rj . The binary
variable xj , j = 1 s, is equal to 1 if and only if route Rj is selected in the
solution. The model is:

s
(CVRP2) minimize γj xj (7)
j=1
subject to
s
aij xj = 1 i ∈ V \ {0} (8)
j=1

s
xj = m (9)
j=1
xj ∈ {0 1} j = 1 s (10)
Constraints (8) impose that each customer i is covered by exactly one route,
and (9) requires that m routes be selected. Because route feasibility is implic-
itly considered in the definition of R, this is a very general model which may
easily take additional constraints into account. Moreover, when the cost matrix
satisfies the triangle inequality (i.e., cij cik + ckj for all i j k ∈ V ), the set
partitioning model CVRP2 may be transformed into an equivalent set cover-
ing model CVRP2 by replacing the equality sign with “” in (8). Any feasible
solution to CVRP2 is clearly feasible for CVRP2 , and any feasible solution
to CVRP2 may be transformed into a feasible CVRP2 solution of smaller or
equal cost. Indeed, if the CVRP2 solution is infeasible for CVRP2, then one
or more customers are visited more than once. These customers may there-
fore be removed from their route by applying shortcuts which will not increase
the solution cost because of the triangle inequality. The main advantage of us-
ing CVRP2 is that only inclusion-maximal feasible routes, among those with
the same cost, need be considered in the definition of R. This significantly
reduces the number of variables. In addition, when using CVRP2 the dual so-
lution space is considerably reduced since dual variables are restricted to be
nonnegative. One of the main drawbacks of models CVRP2 and CVRP2 lies
in their very large number of variables, which in loosely constrained medium
size instances may easily run into the billions. Thus, one has to resort to a
column generation algorithm to solve these problems. The linear program-
ming relaxation of these models tends to be very tight, as shown by Bramel and
Simchi-Levi (1997). Further details on these formulations and their extensions,
as well as additional formulations for the symmetric and asymmetric cases, can
be found in Laporte and Nobert (1987) and in Toth and Vigo (2002b, 2002d).
2.2 Exact algorithms for the CVRP
We now review the main exact approaches presented in the last two decades
for the solution of the CVRP. For a thorough review of previous exact meth-
ods, see Laporte and Nobert (1987). We first describe the algorithms based on
branch-and-bound, including those that make use of the set partitioning for-
mulation and column generation schemes, and we then examine the algorithms
based on branch-and-cut. In practice, the CVRP turns out to be significantly
harder to solve than the TSP. The best CVRP algorithms can rarely tackle in-
stances involving more than 100 vertices, while TSP instances with hundreds
and even thousands of vertices are now routinely solved to optimality.
2.2.1 Branch-and-bound and set partitioning based algorithms

Several branch-and-bound algorithms are available for the solution of the
CVRP. Until the late 1980s, the most effective exact methods were mainly
branch-and-bound algorithms based on elementary combinatorial relaxations.
Recently, more sophisticated bounds have been proposed, namely those based
on Lagrangian relaxations or on the additive bounding procedure, which have
substantially increased the size of the problems that can be solved to optimal-
ity. We now describe some branch-and-bound algorithms with an emphasis on
lower bound computations which constitute the most critical component of
methods of this type. More details on the structure of branch-and-bound al-
gorithm strategies and dominance rules may be found in Toth and Vigo (1998,
2002c, 2002d). We also review in this section exact set partitioning based algo-
rithms for the CVRP.
Many different elementary combinatorial relaxations were used in early
branch-and-bound algorithms, including those based on the Assignment Prob-
lem (AP), on the degree-constrained shortest spanning tree, and on state-space
relaxation. Here we outline the two families of relaxations used as a basis for
the more recent branch-and-bound algorithms for the symmetric and asym-
metric CVRP. A first relaxation is obtained from the integer programming
formulations of these problems by dropping the connectivity and capacity con-
straints. In the symmetric case the resulting problem is a b-Matching Problem
(b-MP), i.e., the problem of determining a minimum cost set of cycles cover-
ing all vertices and such that the degree of each vertex i is equal to bi , where
bi = 2 for all the customer vertices, and b0 = 2m for the depot vertex. It is
easy to see that by adding m − 1 copies of the depot to G the relaxation be-
comes a 2-MP. In the asymmetric case the relaxed problem is the well-known
transportation problem which may be transformed into an AP by introducing
copies of the depot. Also in this case, the AP may be seen as the problem of
determining a set of circuits covering all vertices and such that each vertex has
one entering and one leaving arc. The solution of these relaxed problems may
be infeasible for the CVRP since the demand associated with a cycle or circuit
may exceed the vehicle capacity, and some of these may be disconnected from
the depot. The relaxed problems may then be solved in polynomial time (see,
e.g., Miller and Pekny, 1995, for the b-MP and Dell’Amico and Toth, 2000 for
the AP). However, the quality of the lower bounds obtained with these relax-
ations is generally very poor and not sufficient to solve instances with more
than 15 or 20 customers. Toth and Vigo (2002c) report average gaps in excess
of 20% with respect to the optimal solution value on benchmark CVRP in-
stances. The situation is slightly better for the AP relaxation of the asymmetric
CVRP that yields average gaps of about 10% or less. Laporte et al. (1986) have
proposed a branch-and-bound algorithm for asymmetric CVRP, based on the
AP relaxation and capable of solving randomly generated problems involving
tens of customers and between two and four vehicles.
The second family of elementary relaxations used in recent branch-and-
bound algorithms is based on degree-constrained spanning trees. These re-
laxations extend the well-known 1-tree relaxation proposed by Held and Karp
(1971) for the TSP. The earliest branch-and-bound algorithm based on this
relaxation, proposed by Christofides et al. (1981a), could only solve relatively
small instances. More recently, Fisher (1994) has presented another tree based
relaxation requiring the determination of a so-called m-tree, defined as a mini-
mum cost set of n + m edges spanning the graph. The approach used by Fisher
is based on CVRP1 with the additional assumption that single-customer routes
are not allowed. Fisher modeled the CVRP as the problem of determining an
m-tree with degree equal to 2m at the depot vertex, with additional constraints
on vehicle capacity and a degree of 2 for each customer vertex. The determi-
nation of an m-tree with degree 2m at the depot requires O(n3 ) time. The
degree-constrained m-tree relaxation is easily obtained from CVRP1 by re-
moving the degree constraints (2) for customer vertices and weakening the
capacity constraints (4) into connectivity constraints, i.e., by replacing their
right-hand side with 1. The m-tree solution is not always feasible for the CVRP
since some vertices may have a degree different from 2 and the demand asso-
ciated with the subtrees incident to the depot may exceed the vehicle capacity.
For the asymmetric CVRP, similar relaxations may be derived from directed
trees, also called arborescences, spanning the graph and having an outdegree
equal to m at the depot vertex. To obtain the final bound a minimum cost set of
m vertex-disjoint arcs entering the depot are added to the constrained arbores-
cence. In this case, the relaxed subproblem may be solved in polynomial time,
but again the quality of the resulting lower bound is very poor. Toth and Vigo
(2002c) report that on benchmark asymmetric instances, the average gap of
these relaxations with respect to the optimal solution value is larger than 25%.
Different improved bounding techniques were later developed to narrow
the gap between the lower bound and the optimal solution value of the
CVRP. These include two bounding procedures based on Lagrangian relax-
ation proposed by Fisher (1994) and Miller (1995). These are strengthenings
of the basic CVRP relaxations obtained by dualizing some of the relaxed
constraints in a Lagrangian fashion. In particular, they both include in the
objective function a suitable subset of the capacity constraints (4), whereas
the Fisher relaxation also incorporates degree constraints (2) which were re-
laxed in the m-tree relaxation. As in related problems, good values for the
Lagrangian multipliers associated with the relaxed constraints are determined
by using a subgradient optimization procedure (see, e.g., Held and Karp, 1971;
Held et al., 1974). The main difficulty associated with these relaxations lies in
the exponential cardinality of the set of relaxed constraints which does not
allow for their complete inclusion in the objective function. These authors
include a limited family F of capacity constraints and iteratively generate
the constraints violated by the current solution of the Lagrangian problem.
The process terminates when no violated constraint is detected (hence the
Lagrangian solution is feasible) or a preset number of subgradient itera-
tions have been executed. Redundant constraints are periodically removed
from F . The relax-and-cut algorithm of Martinhon et al. (2000) generalizes
these Lagrangian-based approaches by also considering comb and multistar
inequalities, and moderately improves the quality of the Lagrangian bound.
Some exact algorithms for the CVRP are based on the set partitioning
formulation CVRP2. The first of these is due to Agarwal et al. (1989) who con-
sidered a relaxation of model CVRP2 not including constraints (9) and solved
the resulting model through column generation. Agarwal, Mathur, and Salkin
used their algorithm to solve seven Euclidean CVRP instances with up to 25
customers. Hadjiconstantinou et al. (1995) proposed a branch-and-bound al-
gorithm in which the lower bound was obtained by considering the dual of
the linear relaxation of model CVRP2, following the approach introduced
by Mingozzi et al. (1994). By linear programming duality, any feasible solu-
tion to this dual problem yields a valid lower bound. Hadjiconstantinou et al.
(1995) determined the heuristic dual solutions by combining two relaxations of
the original problem: the q-path relaxation of Christofides et al. (1981a) and
the m-shortest path relaxation of Christofides and Mingozzi (1989). The al-
gorithm was able to solve randomly generated Euclidean instances with up to
30 vertices and benchmark instances with up to 50 vertices. Further details on
set partitioning-based algorithms for the CVRP are provided in Bramel and
Simchi-Levi (2002).
Fischetti et al. (1994) have improved the AP relaxation of the asymmet-
ric CVRP by combining into an additive bounding procedure two new lower
bounds based on disjunctions on infeasible arc subsets and on minimum cost
flows. The additive approach was proposed by Fischetti and Toth (1989) and al-
lows for the combination of different lower bounding procedures, each exploit-
ing a different substructure of the problem under consideration. The resulting
branch-and-bound approach was able to solve randomly generated instances
containing up to 300 vertices and four vehicles. Other bounds for the asym-
metric CVRP may be derived by generalizing the methods proposed for the
symmetric case. For example, Fisher (1994) proposed a way of extending to the
asymmetric CVRP the Lagrangian bound based on m-trees. In this extension
the Lagrangian problem calls for the determination of an undirected m-tree
on the undirected graph obtained by replacing each pair of arcs (i j) and (j i)
with a single edge (i j) of cost cij = min{cij cji }. No computational testing for
this bound was presented by Fisher (1994). Potentially better bounds may be
obtained by explicitly considering the asymmetry of the problem, i.e., by using
m-arborescences rather than m-trees and by strengthening the bound in a La-
grangian fashion as proposed by Toth and Vigo (1995, 1997) for the capacitated
shortest spanning arborescence problem and for the VRP with backhauls.
2.2.2 Branch-and-cut algorithms

Branch-and-cut algorithms currently constitute the best available exact ap-
proach for the solution of the CVRP. Research in this area has been strongly
motivated by the emergence and the success of polyhedral combinatorics as
a framework for the solution of hard combinatorial problems, particularly the
TSP. However, in a recent survey on branch-and-cut approaches for the CVRP,
Naddef and Rinaldi (2002) state: “. . . the amount of research effort spent to
solve CVRP by this method is not comparable with what has been dedicated to
the TSP [. . . the research in this field] is still quite limited and most of it is not
published yet”. In the following we summarize the main available branch-and-
cut approaches for the CVRP. The reader is referred to Naddef and Rinaldi
(2002) for a more detailed presentation.
The use of branch-and-cut for the CVRP is rooted in the exact algorithm
of Laporte et al. (1985). This algorithm uses the Linear Programming (LP) re-
laxation of model CVRP1 without capacity constraints (4) as a basis for the so-
lution of the VRP with capacity and maximum distance restrictions. This initial
relaxation is iteratively strengthened by adding violated capacity constraints
which are heuristically separated by considering the connected components in-
duced by the set of nonzero variables in the current LP solution. Gomory cuts
are also introduced at the root node of the branch-and-cut tree. The algorithm
was capable of solving randomly generated loosely constrained Euclidean and
non-Euclidean instances with two or three vehicles and up to 60 customers.
The first polyhedral study of the CVRP was presented by Cornuéjols and
Harche (1993). The presence of equalities (2) and (3) makes the CVRP
nonfully-dimensional. Therefore, as in the TSP, Cornuéjols and Harche first
considered the full-dimensional polyhedron, containing the CVRP polyhedron
as a face, associated with the so-called Graphical VRP (GVRP) where cus-
tomers may be visited more than once. The basic properties of the GVRP
polyhedron were also investigated. Conditions under which the nonnegativity,
degree and capacity constraints define facets of the GVRP and CVRP poly-
hedra were also determined. Cornuéjols and Harche have extended to the
GVRP and the CVRP several other families of valid inequalities proposed
for the TSP and the graphical TSP. In particular, comb, path, wheelbarrow,
and bicycle inequalities were extended to the capacitated case and again, suffi-
cient conditions under which these inequalities define facets of the GVRP and
CVRP polyhedra were derived. These inequalities were used by Cornuéjols
and Harche as cutting planes to solve two instances of CVRP with 18 and 50
customers, within a branch-and-cut algorithm. The detection of violated in-
equalities was performed manually, starting from the current optimal LP solu-
tion.
Augerat et al. (1995) have developed the first complete branch-and-cut ap-
proach for the CVRP. They described several heuristic separation procedures
for the classes of valid inequalities proposed by Cornuéjols and Harche, as well
as four new classes of valid inequalities. Separation procedures were further in-
vestigated by Augerat et al. (1999). The resulting approach was able to solve
several CVRP instances containing up to 134 customers. Ralphs et al. (2003)

have presented a branch-and-cut algorithm for the CVRP in which an exact
separation of valid m-TSP inequalities is used in addition to heuristic separa-
tion of capacity inequalities. The resulting algorithm was implemented within
the SYMPHONY parallel branch-and-cut-and-price framework and was able
to solve several instances involving fewer than 100 vertices. Lysgaard et al.
(2004) have developed new separation procedures for most of the families of
valid inequalities proposed so far (see also Letchford et al., 2002). Their over-
all branch-and-cut approach, which is further enhanced by the use of Gomory
cuts, was able to solve within moderate computing times previously solved in-
stances and three new medium size ones.
Baldacci et al. (2004) have put forward a branch-and-cut algorithm based
on a two-commodity network flow formulation of the CVRP and requiring
a polynomial number of integer variables. It seems to provide an interesting
alternative to other classical formulations (see also Gouveia, 1995, for a single-
commodity formulation). The overall algorithm strengthens the LP relaxation
by adding violated capacity inequalities and implements various variable re-
duction and branching rules. The results obtained with this approach are com-
parable with those of the other branch-and-cut algorithms just described.
Finally, Fukasawa et al. (2006) have proposed a successful branch-and-cut-
and-price algorithm combining branch-and-cut with the q-routes relaxation
of Christofides et al. (1981a), used here in a column generation fashion.
This method produces tighter bounds than other branch-and-cut algorithms
and is capable of solving several previously unsolved instances with up to
75 customers. Baldacci et al. (2006) have used their set partitioning algorithm,
previously developed for a rollon–rolloff VRP, to solve difficult CVRP in-
stances. Their approach yields bounds whose quality is comparable to those
of Fukasawa et al. (2006), but seems much quicker.
Other branch-and-cut algorithms are described in Achuthan et al. (1996,
2003) and Blasum and Hochstättler (2000). We also mention that the poly-
hedral structure of the special case of CVRP where all the customers have a
unit demand was studied by Campos et al. (1991) and by Araque et al. (1990).
Branch-and-cut algorithms for this problem are presented by Araque et al.
(1994) and by Ghiani et al. (2006).
2.3 Heuristics for the VRP
An impressive number of heuristics have been proposed for the VRP. Ini-
tially these were mainly standard route construction algorithms, whereas more
recently powerful metaheuristic approaches have been developed. In the fol-
lowing we separately review these two families of algorithms. Almost all of
these methods were developed, described and tested for the symmetric VRP.
In addition, since finding a feasible solution with exactly m vehicles is itself
an NP-complete problem, almost all methods assume an unlimited number
of available vehicles. However, it should be observed that many of the pro-

posed methods may be quite easily adapted to take into account additional
practical constraints, although these may affect their overall performance (see,
e.g., Vigo, 1996, for an extension of some classical heuristics to the asymmetric
case).
2.3.1 Classical heuristics

Using the classification proposed by Laporte and Semet (2002), we describe
classical VRP heuristics under these headings: route construction methods,
two-phase methods, and route improvement methods.
Route construction heuristics. Route construction methods were among the

first heuristics for the CVRP and still form the core of many software imple-
mentations for various routing applications. These algorithms typically start
from an empty solution and iteratively build routes by inserting one or more
customers at each iteration, until all customers are routed. Construction algo-
rithms are further subdivided into sequential and parallel, depending on the
number of eligible routes for the insertion of a customer. Sequential methods
expand only one route at a time, whereas parallel methods consider more than
one route simultaneously. Route construction algorithms are fully specified
by their three main ingredients, namely an initialization criterion, a selection
criterion specifying which customers are chosen for insertion at the current
iteration, and an insertion criterion to decide where to locate the chosen cus-
tomers into the current routes.
The first and most famous heuristic of this group was proposed by Clarke
and Wright (1964) and is based on the concept of saving, an estimate of the
cost reduction obtained by serving two customers sequentially in the same
route, rather than in two separate ones. If i is the last customer of a route
and j is the first customer of another route, the associated saving is defined
as sij = ci0 + c0j − cij . If sij is positive, then serving i and j consecutively in
a route is profitable. The Clarke and Wright algorithm considers all customer
pairs and sorts the savings in nonincreasing order. Starting with a solution in
which each customer appears separately in a route, the customer pair list is ex-
amined and two routes are merged whenever this is feasible. Generally, a route
merge is accepted only if the associated saving is nonnegative but, if the num-
ber of vehicles is to be minimized, then negative saving merges may also be
considered. The Clarke and Wright algorithm is inherently parallel since more
than one route is active at any time. However, it may easily be implemented
in a sequential fashion. The resulting algorithm is quite fast but may have a
poor performance (see, e.g., Laporte and Semet, 2002). Golden et al. (1977),
Paessens (1988), and Nelson et al. (1985) have proposed various enhancement
strategies of the savings approach aimed at improving either its effectiveness or
its computational efficiency by means of better data structures. Other attempts
to improve the effectiveness of the savings method were made by Desrochers
and Verhoog (1989), Altinkemer and Gavish (1991), and by Wark and Holt
(1994) who proposed to implement route merges by using a matching algo-

rithm, together with a more sophisticated estimate of actual merge savings.
The results obtained with these algorithms are in general better than those of
previous savings methods, but matching-based algorithms require much larger
computing times.
Another classical route construction heuristic is the sequential insertion al-
gorithm of Mole and Jameson (1976). The algorithm uses as selection and
insertion criterion the evaluation of the extra distance resulting from the in-
sertion of an unrouted customer k between two consecutive customers i and j
of the current route, namely α(i k j) = cik + ckj − λcij , where λ is a user-
controlled parameter. Variations of this criterion taking into account other
factors, such as the distance of the customer from the depot, were also con-
sidered. After each insertion, the current route is possibly improved by using
a 3-opt procedure. A more general and effective two-step insertion heuristic
was proposed by Christofides et al. (1979). In the first step, a sequential inser-
tion algorithm is used to determine a set of feasible routes. The second step
is a parallel insertion approach. For each route determined in the first step,
a representative customer is selected and a set of single-customer routes is
initialized with these customers. The remaining unrouted customers are then
inserted by using a regret criterion, where the difference between the best and
the second-best insertion cost is taken into account, and partial routes are im-
proved by means of a 3-opt procedure. The resulting algorithm is superior to
that of Mole and Jameson and represents a good compromise between effec-
tiveness and efficiency.
Two-phase heuristics. Two-phase methods are based on the decomposition of

the VRP solution process into the two separate subproblems:
(1) clustering: determine a partition of the customers into subsets, each cor-
responding to a route, and
(2) routing: determine the sequence of customers on each route.
In a cluster-first-route-second method, customers are first grouped into clus-
ters and the routes are then determined by suitably sequencing the customers
within each cluster. Different techniques have been proposed for the clustering
phase, while the routing phase amounts to solving a TSP.
The sweep algorithm, due to Wren (1971), Wren and Holliday (1972), and
Gillett and Miller (1974), is often referred to as the first example of cluster-
first-route-second approach. The algorithm applies to planar VRP instances.
The algorithm starts with an arbitrary customer and then sequentially assigns
the remaining customers to the current vehicle by considering them in order
of increasing polar angle with respect to the depot and the initial customer.
As soon as the current customer cannot be feasibly assigned to the current
vehicle, a new route is initialized with it. Once all customers are assigned to
vehicles, each route is separately defined by solving a TSP. Another early two-
phase method is the truncated branch-and-bound method of Christofides et al.
(1979) in which the set of routes is determined through an adaptation of an ex-

act branch-and-bound algorithm that uses a branching-on-routes strategy. The
decision tree contains as many levels as the number of available vehicles, and
at each level of the decision tree a given node corresponds to a partial solu-
tion made up of some complete routes. The descendant nodes correspond to
all possible routes including a subset of the unrouted customers. The running
time of the algorithm is controlled by limiting to one the number of routes
generated at each level.
The Fisher and Jaikumar (1981) algorithm solves the clustering step by
means of an appropriately defined Generalized Assignment Problem (GAP)
which calls for the determination of a minimum cost assignment of items to
a given set of bins of capacity Q, and where the items are characterized by a
weight and an assignment cost for each bin. Each vehicle is assigned a repre-
sentative customer, called a seed, and the assignment cost of a customer to a
vehicle is equal to its distance to the seed. The GAP is then solved, either opti-
mally or heuristically, and the final routes are determined by solving a TSP on
each cluster.
Another two-phase method working with a fixed number m of vehicles was
described by Bramel and Simchi-Levi (1995). This algorithm determines route
seeds by solving a capacitated location problem, where m customers are se-
lected by minimizing the total distance between each customer and its closest
seed, and by imposing that the total demand associated with each seed be at
most Q. Once seeds have been determined and the single-customer routes
are initialized, the remaining customers are inserted in the current routes by
minimizing insertion costs. Various ways of approximating the insertion cost
are proposed and analyzed. It is worth noting that all three cluster-first-route-
second approaches just described allow for a direct control of the number of
routes in the final solution, whereas the sweep algorithm does not. The perfor-
mance of these algorithms is generally comparable to that of route construction
algorithms in terms of effectiveness. The location based approach of Bramel
and Simchi-Levi produces better solutions but requires much larger computing
times.
A different family of two-phase methods is the class of so-called petal algo-
rithms. These generate a large set of feasible routes, called petals, and select
the final subset by solving a set partitioning model. Foster and Ryan (1976)
and Ryan et al. (1993) have proposed heuristic rules for determining the set of
routes to be selected, while Renaud et al. (1996b) have described an extension
that considers more involved configurations, called 2-petals, consisting of two
embedded or intersecting routes. The overall performance of these algorithms
is generally superior to that of the sweep algorithm.
Finally, in route-first-cluster-second methods, a giant TSP tour over all cus-
tomers is constructed in a first phase and later subdivided into feasible routes.
Examples of such algorithms are given by Beasley (1983), Haimovich and
Rinnooy Kan (1985), and Bertsimas and Simchi-Levi (1996), but the perfor-
mance of this approach is generally poor.
Route improvement heuristics. Local search algorithms are often used to im-
prove initial solutions generated by other heuristics. Starting from a given solu-
tion, a local search method applies simple modifications, such as arc exchanges
or customer movements, to obtain neighbor solutions of possibly better cost.
If an improving solution is found, it then becomes the current solution and the
process iterates; otherwise a local minimum has been identified.
A large variety of neighborhoods are available. These may be subdivided
into intra-route neighborhoods, if they operate on a single route at a time, or
inter-route neighborhoods if they consider more than one route simultaneously.
The most common neighborhood type is the λ-opt heuristic of Lin (1965) for
the TSP, where λ edges are removed from the current solution and replaced by
λ others. The computing time required to examine all neighbors of a solution
is proportional to nλ . Thus, only λ = 2 or 3 are used in practice. As an alterna-
tive, one can use restricted neighborhoods characterized by subsets of moves
associated with larger λ values, such as Or-exchanges (Or, 1976) or the 4-opt*
neighborhood of Renaud et al. (1996a) which considers only a subset of all
potential 4-opt exchanges. Laporte and Semet (2002) have conducted a com-
putational comparison of some basic route improvement procedures. More
complex inter-route neighborhoods are analyzed by Thompson and Psaraftis
(1993), Van Breedam (1994), and Kindervater and Savelsbergh (1997).
2.3.2 Metaheuristics
Several metaheuristics have been applied to the VRP. With respect to clas-
sical heuristics, they perform a more thorough search of the solution space and
are less likely to end with a local optimum. These can be broadly divided into
three classes:
(1) local search, including simulated annealing, deterministic annealing,
and tabu search;
(2) population search, including genetic search and adaptive memory pro-
cedures;
(3) learning mechanisms, including neural networks and ant colony opti-
mization.
The best heuristics often combine ideas borrowed from different meta-
heuristic principles. Recent surveys of VRP metaheuristics can be found in
Gendreau et al. (2002), Cordeau and Laporte (2004), and Cordeau et al.
(2005).
Local search algorithms explore the solution space by iteratively moving
from a solution xt at iteration t to a solution xt+1 in the neighborhood N(xt )
of xt until a stopping criterion is satisfied. If f (x) denotes the cost of solution x,
then f (xt+1 ) is not necessarily smaller than f (xt ). As a result, mechanisms
must be implemented to avoid cycling. In simulated annealing, a solution x is
drawn randomly from N(xt ). If f (x) f (xt ), then xt+1 := x. Otherwise,

x with probability pt
xt+1 :=
xt with probability 1 − pt
where pt is a decreasing function of t and of f (x) − f (xt ). This probability is

often equal to

f (x) − f (xt )
pt = exp −
θt
where θt is the temperature at iteration t, usually defined as a nonincreasing
function of t. Deterministic annealing (Dueck, 1990, 1993) is similar. There
are two main versions of this algorithm: in a threshold-accepting algorithm,
xt+1 := x if f (x) < f (xt ) + θ1 , where θ1 is a user controlled parameter; in
record-to-record travel, a record is the best known solution x∗ , and xt+1 := x
if f (xt+1 ) < θ2 f (x∗ ), where θ2 is also user controlled. In tabu search, in or-
der to avoid cycling, any solution possessing some given attribute of xt+1 is
declared tabu for a number of iterations. At iteration t, the search moves to
the best nontabu solution x in N(xt ). These local search algorithms are rarely
implemented in their basic version, and their success depends on the careful
implementation of several mechanisms. The rule employed to define neighbor-
hoods is critical to most local search heuristics. In simulated annealing several
rules have been proposed to define θt (see Osman, 1993). Tabu search relies
on various strategies to implement tabu tenures (also known as short term
memory), search diversification (also known as long term memory), and search
intensification which accentuates the search in a promising region.
Population search algorithms operate on several generations of solution
populations. In genetic search it is common to repeat the following oper-
ation k times: extract two parent solutions from the populations to create
two offspring using a crossover operation, and apply a mutation operation
to each offspring; then remove the 2k worst elements from the popula-
tion and replace them with the 2k offspring. Several crossover rules are
available for sequencing problems (Bean, 1994; Potvin, 1996; Drezner, 2003;
Prins, 2004). In adaptive memory procedures, an offspring is created by ex-
tracting and recombining elements of several parents. In the initial version
proposed by Rochat and Taillard (1995) for the VRP, nonoverlapping routes
are extracted from several parents to create a partial solution. This solution is
then gradually completed and optimized by tabu search.
Neural networks are models composed of richly interconnected units
through weighted links, like neurons in the brain. They gradually construct a
solution through a feedback mechanism that modifies the link weights to better
match an observed output to a described output. In the field of vehicle routing
neural network models called the elastic net and the self-organizing map are
deformable templates that adjust themselves to the contour of the vertices to
generate a feasible VRP solution. An example is provided by Ghaziri (1993).
Ant colony algorithms (see Dorigo et al., 1999) also use a learning mechanism.
They are derived from an analogy with ants which lay some pheromone on
their trail when foraging for food. With time more pheromone is deposited
on the more frequented trails. When constructing a VRP solution a move can
be assigned a higher probability of being selected if it has previously led to a

better solution in previous iterations.
In what follows we summarize the most effective metaheuristics for the
CVRP. Initially the best methods were almost exclusively based on tabu search
but in recent years several excellent methods inspired from different paradigms
have been proposed.
Local search heuristics. A limited number of simulated annealing heuristics

for the CVRP were proposed in the early 1990s. Osman’s implementation
(Osman, 1993) is the most involved and also the most successful. It defines
neighborhoods by means of a 2-interchange scheme and applies a different
rule of temperature changes. Instead of using a nonincreasing function, as do
most authors in the field, Osman decreases θt continuously as long as the so-
lution improves, but whenever xt+1 = xt , θt is either halved or replaced by the
temperature at which the incumbent was identified. This algorithm succeeded
in producing good solutions but was not competitive with the best tabu search
implementations available at the same period.
A large number of tabu search algorithms have been produced over the past
fifteen years (a survey is available in Cordeau and Laporte, 2004). In the first
known implementation, due to Willard (1989), a CVRP solution is represented
as a giant tour containing several copies of the depot and inter-depot chains
corresponding to feasible vehicle routes, and neighborhoods are defined by
means of 3-opt exchanges. The method was soon to be superseded by more
powerful algorithms, including those of Osman (1993), Taillard (1993), and
Gendreau et al. (1994).
Taillard’s algorithm remains to this day one of the most successful tabu
search implementations for the CVRP. It is based on the use of an 1-inter-
change mechanism to define neighbor solutions, combined with periodic route
reoptimizations by means of an exact TSP algorithm (Volgenant and Jonker,
1983). The algorithm also uses random tabu durations. A continuous diversifi-
cation mechanism that penalizes frequently performed moves is implemented
in order to provide a more thorough exploration of the search space. Finally,
Taillard’s algorithm employs a decomposition scheme that allows for the use
of parallel computing. In planar problems the customer set is partitioned into
sectors and then concentric rings, while in random instances the regions are
defined by means of shortest spanning arborescences rooted at the depot.
The region boundaries are periodically updated to produce a diversification
effect.
The Taburoute algorithm of Gendreau et al. (1994) moves at each itera-
tion a vertex from its current route to another route containing one of its
closest neighbors. Insertions are performed simultaneously with a local re-
optimization of the route, based on the GENI procedure (Gendreau et al.,
1992). Only a subset of vertices are considered for reinsertion at any given
iteration. No vertex can return to its former route during the next θ itera-
tions, where θ is randomly selected in a closed interval. Taburoute also uses
a continuous diversification mechanism. During the course of the search in-

feasible solutions are penalized. This mechanism is implemented by replacing
the solution value f (x) associated at solution x with a penalized objective
f (x) = f (x) + αQ(x) + βL(x), where Q(x) is the total capacity violation
of solution x and L(x) is the total route length violation. The two parameters
α and β self-adjust during the search to produce a mix of feasible and infeasible
solutions: every μ iterations, α (resp. β) is divided by 2 if the past μ solutions
were feasible with respect to capacity (resp. route length), or multiplied by 2
if they were all infeasible with respect to capacity (resp. route length). Other
features of Taburoute include the use of random tabu durations, periodic route
reoptimizations by means of the US procedure of Gendreau et al. (1992), false
starts to initialize the search, and a final intensification phase around the best
known solution.
The Rego and Roucairol (1996) Tabuchain algorithm is based on the use of
ejection chains involving routes to define neighborhoods. This process bumps
a vertex from one route of the chain to another route. The last bumped ver-
tex may be relocated in the position of the first bumped vertex or elsewhere.
The process ensures that no arc or edge is considered more than once in
the solution. As in Taburoute, intermediate infeasible solutions are allowed.
The authors have also implemented a sequential and a parallel version of
their method. Another ejection scheme, called Flower, was later developed
by Rego (1998). It is based on the idea of exploiting the representation of
routes as blossoms and of paths as stems, and of performing ejection moves
by means of edge deletions and creations. This method was not as successful
as Tabuchain. Another method employing ejection chains was developed by
Xu and Kelly (1996). It oscillates between ejection chains and vertex swaps
between two routes. The ejection chains are obtained by solving an auxiliary
network flow problem. On the whole this method succeeded in obtaining sev-
eral good CVRP solutions on benchmark instances but it is rather involved and
time consuming.
More recently, Ergun et al. (2003) have developed a Very Large Neigh-
borhood Search (VLNS) algorithm for the VRP. This algorithm operates
on several routes simultaneously, not unlike what is done in cyclic transfers
(Thompson and Psaraftis, 1993) or in ejection chains. Neighborhoods are de-
fined by a combination of 2-opt moves, vertex swaps between routes, and vertex
insertions in different routes. The best choice of moves and of routes involved
in the moves is determined through the solution of a network flow problem
on an auxiliary graph. One advantage of VLNS is that it allows a broad search
by acting on several routes at once. Its main disadvantage lies in the effort
required at each iteration to perform moves.
A very useful concept put forward by Toth and Vigo (2003) is that of Gran-
ular Tabu Search (GTS). This algorithm a priori removes from the graph long
edges that are unlikely to belong to an optimal solution. To determine these
edges, the problem is first solved by means of a fast heuristic, e.g., the Clarke
and Wright (1964) algorithm, and the average edge cost c̄ in this solution
is determined. Then only two families of edges are retained: those incident
to the depot, and those whose cost does not exceed βc̄, where β is a user-
defined sparsification parameter. The authors show that on benchmark in-
stances, choosing β in [10 20] yields the elimination of between 80–90% of
all edges. Granular tabu search was implemented in conjunction with some of
the features of Taillard’s algorithm (Taillard, 1993) and Taburoute (Gendreau
et al., 1994), and neighbor solutions were obtained by performing intra-route
and inter-route exchanges.
Deterministic annealing was first applied to the VRP by Golden et al. (1998)
and more recently by Li et al. (2005). The latter algorithm combines the record-
to-record principle of Dueck (1993) with GTS. It works on a sparsified graph
containing only a proportion α of the 40 shortest edges incident to each ver-
tex, where α varies throughout the algorithm. The algorithm is applied several
times from three initial solutions generated by the Clarke and Wright (1964)
algorithm, with savings sij defined as ci0 + c0j − λcij , and λ = 06 14 and 16.
Neighbors are defined by means of intra- and inter-route 2-opt moves, and
nonimproving solutions are accepted as long as their cost does not exceed that
of the incumbent by more than 1%. Whenever the solution has not improved
for a number of iterations, a perturbation is applied to the best known solution
to restart the search. This is achieved by temporarily moving some vertices to
different positions.
Population search heuristics. The Adaptive Memory Procedure (AMP) put

forward by Rochat and Taillard (1995) constitutes a major contribution to the
field of metaheuristics. Initially developed in the context of the VRP, it is of
general applicability and has been used, for example, to solve political district-
ing problems (Bozkaya et al., 2003). An adaptive memory is a pool of good
solutions which is updated by replacing its worst elements with better ones. In
order to generate a new solution, several solutions are selected from the pool
and recombined. In the context of the VRP, vehicle routes are extracted from
these solutions and used as the basis of a new solution. The extraction process
is applied as long as it is possible to identify routes that do not overlap with pre-
viously selected routes. When this is no longer possible, a search process (e.g.,
tabu search) is initiated from a partially constructed solution made up of the
selected routes and some unrouted customers. Any solution constructed in this
fashion replaces the worst solution of the pool if it has a better cost. Tarantilis
and Kiranoudis (2002) have proposed a variant to this scheme. In a first phase
a solution is obtained by means of the Paessens (1988) constructive procedure,
which is an application of the Clarke and Wright savings heuristic followed by
2-opt moves, vertex swaps between routes, and vertex reinsertions. In order to
generate new solutions from the adaptive memory, Tarantilis and Kiranoudis
extract route segments, called bones, as opposed to full vehicle routes as did
Rochat and Taillard.
Prins (2004) has developed an algorithm combining two main features of
evolutionary search, namely crossovers and mutations. Crossovers consist of
creating offspring solutions from parents, while mutations are obtained here
by applying a local search algorithm to an offspring. This combination of so-
lution recombination and local search is sometimes referred to as a memetic
algorithm (Moscato and Cotta, 2003). In this algorithm, solutions are repre-
sented as a giant tour without trip delimiters. To create an offspring from two
parents, a chain (i j) is first selected from the first parent and the vertices
of the second parent are scanned from position j + 1 by skipping those of the
chain (i j). A second offspring is generated in a similar way by reversing
the roles of the two parents. Offspring are improved by applying a combination
of vertex and edge reinsertions, vertex swaps, combined vertex and edge swaps.
Two other memetic algorithms have recently been proposed by Berger and
Barkaoui (2004) and by Mester and Bräysy (2005). The first works on two pop-
ulations whose sizes are kept constant through the replacement of parents by
newly created offspring, and migrations take place between the two popula-
tions. Offspring are obtained by combining routes from two parents as long as
this can be done without overlapping, and by inserting the unrouted customers
according to a proximity criterion. A VLNS heuristic (Shaw, 1998) combin-
ing three insertion mechanisms is then applied to the offspring, followed by
an improvement scheme consisting of removing vertices from the solution and
reinserting them by means of the I1 procedure of Solomon (1987).
The Active Guided Evolution Strategies (AGES) of Mester and Bräysy was
initially developed to solve the VRP with time windows and was later applied to
the classical VRP. It combines local search (Voudouris, 1997) with an evolution
strategy (Rechenberg, 1973) to produce an iterative two-stage procedure. The
evolutionary strategy uses a deterministic rule to select a parent solution and
create a single offspring from a single parent. The offspring replaces the parent
if it improves upon it. Offspring are improved by means of an elaborate search
procedure combining granular tabu search, continuous diversification, vertex
swaps and moves, 2-opt* moves (Potvin and Rousseau, 1995), VLNS (Shaw,
1998), and restarts.
Learning mechanisms. A limited number of heuristics based on learning

mechanisms have been proposed for the VRP. None of the known neural
networks based methods is satisfactory, and the early ant colony based heuris-
tics could not compete with the best available approaches. Recently, how-
ever, Reimann et al. (2004) have proposed a well-performing heuristics called
D-ants. The method repeatedly applies two phases until a stopping criterion
is reached. In the first phase, a first generation of good solutions is gener-
ated through the applications of a savings based heuristic (Clarke and Wright,
1964) and a 2-opt improvement procedure is applied to each solution. New
generations of solutions are then created by benefiting from the knowledge
gained in producing past generations. Thus, instead of using the standard sav-
β
ings sij = ci0 + c0j − cij , an attractiveness value χij = τijα sij is now employed,
where τijα contains information on how good linking i and j turned out to be
in previous generations, and α and β are user-controlled parameters. Vertices

i and j are linked with probability pij = χij /( (h )∈Ωk χh ), where Ωk is the
set of the feasible (i j) pairs yielding the k best savings. In the second phase
the best solution identified in the first phase is decomposed into subproblems
which are then reoptimized using the procedure used in the first phase.
Computational comparison of metaheuristics. Cordeau et al. (2005) provide

a computational comparison of recent VRP heuristics on the 14 Christofides
et al. (1979) instances (50 n 199) and on the 20 larger Li et al. (2005)
instances (200 n 480). Most metaheuristics used in the comparison con-
sistently yield solutions whose value lies within 1% of the best known value.
On the Christofides et al. (1979) instances, the best solutions are obtained
by Taillard (1993), Rochat and Taillard (1995), and Mester and Bräysy (2005).
If the two instance sets are taken together, the best performers, in terms of ac-
curacy and computing time are probably Mester and Bräysy (2005), Tarantilis
and Kiranoudis (2002), and Prins (2004). It should be noted that these three
methods all combine population search and local search, thus allowing for a
broad and deep exploration of the solution space.
As noted by Cordeau et al. (2002b) heuristics should not be judged solely
on speed and accuracy. Simplicity and flexibility are also important. In this re-
spect the Li et al. (2005) record-to-record algorithm is rather interesting: this
algorithm possesses a simple structure and is capable of generating very high
quality solutions. As far as flexibility is concerned, the granularity principle
(Toth and Vigo, 2003) and the adaptive memory concept (Rochat and Taillard,
1995) are general and useful ideas which can easily be applied to other prob-
lems.
3 The vehicle routing problem with time windows
The Vehicle Routing Problem with Time Windows (VRPTW) is an impor-

tant generalization of the classical VRP in which service at every customer i
must start within a given time window [ai bi ]. A vehicle is allowed to arrive be-
fore ai and wait until the customer becomes available, but arrivals after bi are
prohibited. The VRPTW has numerous applications in distribution manage-
ment. Common examples are beverage and food delivery, newspaper delivery,
and commercial and industrial waste collection (see, e.g., Golden et al., 2002).
The VRPTW is NP-hard since it generalizes the CVRP which is obtained
when ai = 0 and bi = ∞ for every customer i. In the case of a fixed fleet
size, even finding a feasible solution to the VRPTW is itself an NP-complete
problem (Savelsbergh, 1985). As a result, research on the VRPTW has concen-
trated on heuristics. Nevertheless, when the problem is sufficiently constrained
(i.e., when time windows are sufficiently narrow), realistic size instances can be
solved optimally through mathematical programming techniques. This section
presents a mathematical formulation of the VRPTW followed by a description
of some of the most important available exact and heuristic algorithms. It is
worth pointing out that while exact methods usually minimize distance, most
heuristics consider a hierarchical objective which first minimizes the number
of vehicles used and then distance.
3.1 Formulation of the VRPTW
The VRPTW can be defined on a directed graph G = (V A), where

|V | = n + 2, and the depot is represented by the two vertices 0 and n + 1.
Feasible vehicle routes then correspond to paths starting at vertex 0 and end-
ing at vertex n + 1. The set of vehicles is denoted by K, with |K| = m. Let
si denote the service time at i (with s0 = sn+1 = 0) and let tij be the travel time
from i to j. In addition to the time window [ai bi ] associated with each vertex
i ∈ N = V \ {0 n + 1}, time windows [a0 b0 ] and [an+1 bn+1 ] can also be asso-
ciated with the depot vertex. If no particular restrictions are imposed on vehicle
availability, one may simply set a0 = mini∈N {ai − t0i }, b0 = maxi∈N {bi − t0i },
an+1 = mini∈N {ai + si + tin+1 }, and bn+1 = maxi∈N {bi + si + tin+1 }. As in
the CVRP, let qi denote the demand of customer i, and let Q be the vehicle
capacity.
While several models are available for the VRPTW, this problem is often
formulated as a multicommodity network flow model with time window and ca-
pacity constraints. This model involves two types of variables: binary variables
xkij , (i j) ∈ A, k ∈ K, equal to 1 if and only if arc (i j) is used by vehicle k, and
continuous variables wik , i ∈ N, k ∈ K, indicating the time at which vehicle k
starts servicing vertex i. Let δ+ (i) = {j: (i j) ∈ A} and δ− (j) = {i: (i j) ∈ A}.
The problem can then be stated as follows (see, e.g., Desrochers et al., 1988):

minimize cij xkij (11)
k∈K (ij)∈A
subject to

xkij = 1 i ∈ N (12)
k∈K j∈δ+ (i)

xk0j = 1 k ∈ K (13)
j∈δ+ (0)

xkij − xkji = 0 k ∈ K j ∈ N (14)
i∈δ− (j) i∈δ+ (j)

xkin+1 = 1 k ∈ K (15)
i∈δ− (n+1)

xkij wik + si + tij − wjk 0 k ∈ K (i j) ∈ A (16)
ai wik bi k ∈ K i ∈ V (17)

qi xkij Q k ∈ K (18)
i∈N j∈δ+ (i)
xkij ∈ {0 1} k ∈ K (i j) ∈ A (19)

The objective function (11) minimizes the total routing cost. Constraints
(12) state that each customer is visited exactly once, while constraints (13)–(15)
ensure that each vehicle is used exactly once and that flow conservation is
satisfied at each customer vertex. The consistency of the time variables wik
is ensured through constraints (16) while time windows are imposed by (17).
These constraints also eliminate subtours. Finally, constraints (18) enforce the
vehicle capacity restriction.
Formulation (11)–(19) is nonlinear because of constraints (16). These con-
straints can, however, be linearized as follows:

wjk wik + si + tij − Mij 1 − xkij k ∈ K (i j) ∈ A (20)
where Mij = max{0 bi + si + tij − aj } is a constant. As suggested by Desrochers
and Laporte (1991), the bounds on the time variables bki can also be strength-
ened:

wik ai + max{0 aj − ai + sj + tji }xkji k ∈ K i ∈ V (21)
j∈δ− (i)

wik bi − max{0 bi − bj + si + tij }xkij k ∈ K i ∈ V (22)
j∈δ+ (i)
3.2 Exact algorithms for the VRPTW
As for most other vehicle routing problems, it is difficult to solve the

VRPTW exactly through classical simplex-based branch-and-bound methods,
even for small instances. This is in large part explained by the fact that the LP
relaxation of the problem provides a weak lower bound. The first optimiza-
tion algorithm for the VRPTW can be attributed to Kolen et al. (1987) who
used dynamic programming coupled with state space relaxation (Christofides
et al., 1981b) to compute lower bounds within a branch-and-bound algorithm.
Instances with n 15 were solved using this approach. Most subsequent algo-
rithms rely either on the generation of valid inequalities to strengthen the LP
relaxation or on mathematical decomposition techniques. This section reviews
the three main available approaches: Lagrangian relaxation, column gener-
ation, and branch-and-cut. Additional references on the subject can also be
found in the Cordeau et al. (2002a) review.
3.2.1 Lagrangian relaxation based algorithms

Lagrangian relaxation can be applied to the VRPTW in several ways. It
is well known that when the subproblem obtained by relaxing some of the
constraints possesses the integrality property, the best lower bound obtained
by Lagrangian relaxation (i.e., the value of the Lagrangian dual) is equal to
the value of the linear programming relaxation of the original problem. But
as mentioned above, the LP relaxation of formulation (11)–(19) provides a

weak lower bound which will usually prevent the problem from being solved
by branch-and-bound. As a result, successful implementations of Lagrangian
relaxation for the VRPTW should retain at least some of the complicating con-
straints in the subproblem.
Fisher (1994) and Fisher et al. (1997) have described Lagrangian relaxation
based on m-trees (see Section 2.2.1). This approach relaxes the flow conserva-
tion constraints as well as the capacity and time window constraints. Violated
capacity constraints are handled by identifying subsets of customers S ⊆ N
that must be visited by at least κ(S) vehicles and imposing the constraint

xkij κ(S) (23)
k∈K i∈V \S j∈S
These constraints are relaxed in a Lagrangian fashion so that the resulting

problem remains an m-tree problem with modified costs. Time windows are
handled similarly by identifying infeasible paths and imposing the constraint
that at least one arc in the path be left out of the solution. This approach has
solved a few of the Solomon (1987) test instances with n = 100. In addition
to the m-tree relaxation method, Fisher et al. (1997) have also experimented
with a variable splitting approach in which additional variables yik , equal to 1
if and only if customer i is visited by vehicle k, are introduced in the formu-

lation, and the constraints j∈V xkij = yik (i ∈ N, k ∈ K) are dualized. The
Lagrangian subproblem decomposes into a semi-assignment problem in the
yik variables which is solvable by inspection, and a set of m elementary shortest
path problems with time windows and capacity constraints.
Another possible Lagrangian relaxation consists of dualizing the demand
constraints. Let λ = (λi ) (i ∈ N) be the vector of multipliers associated with
constraints (12) requiring that each customer be visited exactly once. For given
values of the multipliers, the Lagrangian subproblem L(λ) obtained by relax-
ing these constraints in the objective function is

min (cij − λi ) xkij + λi (24)
k∈K (ij)∈A i∈N
subject to constraints (13)–(19).

This subproblem does not possess the integrality property. It does, however,
decompose into m disjoint elementary shortest-path problems with capacity
and time window constraints. When all vehicles are identical, a single prob-
lem can be solved to compute the lower bound. The Lagrangian dual, i.e.,
the problem of finding optimal multipliers that maximize L(λ), is a concave
nondifferentiable maximization problem. Using subgradient and bundle meth-
ods, Kohl and Madsen (1997) were able to solve some instances with up to
100 customers. They reported optimal solutions to each of the 27 clustered
and short-horizon Solomon instances.
Kallehauge et al. (2006) have developed a stabilized cutting-plane algorithm

to solve the Lagrangian dual. Cutting planes are generated by solving the La-
grangian subproblem and are introduced in a master problem which imposes
bounds (i.e., a trust region) on the dual variables to ensure the stability of their
values from one iteration to the next. Optimizing the relaxed master problem
(a maximization linear program) provides a lower bound on the value of the
original problem. To obtain feasible integer solutions, the cutting-plane algo-
rithm is embedded within a branch-and-bound algorithm and valid inequalities
are introduced in the master problem. Because the relaxed master problem
is stated on the dual variables, violated subtour elimination constraints and
2-path inequalities (see Section 3.2.2) are added as columns to this problem.
This approach has yielded good results on the Solomon test instances and was
able to solve two large instances with 400 and 1000 customers, respectively.
3.2.2 Column generation algorithms

Column generation is intimately related to constraint generation and can be
seen as a special way of updating the multipliers associated with the relaxed
constraints. Let Ωk denote the set of feasible paths for vehicle k ∈ K. For each
path ω ∈ Ωk , let cωk be the cost of this path and let θk be a binary variable
ω
equal to 1 if and only if vehicle k uses path ω. Let also aiω be the number of
times customer i ∈ N is visited by path ω. As first suggested by Balinski and
Quandt (1964), the VRPTW can be stated as follows:

k k
minimize cω θω (25)
k∈K ω∈Ωk
subject to

k
aiω θω = 1 i ∈ N (26)
k∈K ω∈Ωk

k
θω = 1 k ∈ K (27)
ω∈Ωk
k
θω ∈ {0 1} k ∈ K ω ∈ Ωk (28)
Because the sets Ωk are likely to have a very large cardinality, this problem
can be tackled by a branch-and-bound algorithm in which the linear relaxations
are solved by column generation. At each node of the enumeration tree, a re-
stricted column generation master problem is solved over the current set of
columns. New columns of negative reduced cost are generated by solving a re-
source constrained shortest path problem (13)–(19) with modified arc costs
reflecting the current values of the dual variables associated with the con-
straints of the column generation master problem. This process stops when no
negative reduced cost column can be generated. Because the column genera-
tion subproblem is equivalent to the Lagrangian subproblem L(λ), the lower
bound provided by column generation is equal to the value of the Lagrangian
dual. The dual of the LP relaxation of formulation (25)–(28) is, in fact, equiv-
alent to the Lagrangian dual defined in the previous section. This formulation
can also be obtained by applying the Dantzig–Wolfe decomposition principle
(Dantzig and Wolfe, 1960) to the original formulation (11)–(19).
Branching must be performed at each node of the branch-and-bound tree,
where the optimal solution to the linear relaxation includes fractional path
variables. While it is in principle possible to branch directly on fractional θω
variables, this approach is difficult to implement in practice. Indeed, it is easy
to set such variables equal to 1 but it is much more difficult to impose the op-
posite decision. In the latter case, care must be taken to ensure that the same
path will not be generated more than once by the subproblem. To this purpose,
one could use a modified dynamic programming algorithm to implicitly handle
forbidden paths, or a p-shortest path algorithm where p is equal to the num-
ber of forbidden paths plus one. This would ensure the generation of at least
one valid path of negative reduced cost whenever one exists. A more conve-
nient branching scheme consists of making decisions on the original arc flow
variables xkij or on sums of these variables. For example, binary decisions can
be made on the following sum of variables:

xkij
j∈N k∈K
where i ∈ N, N ⊆ δ+ (i), and K ⊆ K. Forcing this sum to be equal to 1

requires that some vertex in subset N be visited immediately after i by some
vehicle. If |N | = 1, then the corresponding vertex must be visited after i by
some vehicle. If |K | = 1, then vertex i is implicitly assigned to vehicle k. The
special case |N | = 1 and |K | = 1 is equivalent to forcing xkij = 1 for some
given j and k. It is worth pointing out that all such decisions can be handled
directly at the subproblem level through the simple elimination of arcs in the
networks.
Column generation was successfully applied to the VRPTW by Desrochers
et al. (1992) and by Kohl et al. (1999). The latter authors also used valid
inequalities to strengthen the bounds obtained by column generation. More
specifically, let

x(S) = xkij
k∈K i∈V \S j∈S
denote the flow into set S ⊆ N and denote by κ(S) the minimum number of
vehicles needed to serve all customers in S. Then the constraint
x(S) κ(S) (29)
is a valid inequality for the VRPTW and is called a κ-path inequality. Com-
puting κ(S) is a difficult problem which is equivalent to solving the VRPTW
on a subset of vertices with the objective of minimizing the number of vehi-
cles used. Kohl et al. (1999) have, in fact, restricted their attention to the case
κ = 2. Determining whether κ(S) = 1 for a particular subset S can be achieved

by checking that the capacity of a single vehicle is sufficient and the corre-
sponding TSPTW is feasible. The latter problem is NP-hard but can be solved
relatively quickly by dynamic programming for small instances. The algorithm
of Kohl et al. was capable of solving 70 of the 87 Solomon short-horizon in-
stances to optimality. Cook and Rich (1999) have extended this approach to
the case κ 6 by using parallel computing and replacing the TSPTW feasibility
problem with a VRPTW. They were thus able to solve 80 of the short-horizon
instances. They also solved 30 of the 81 long-horizon instances.
While the constrained elementary shortest path problem is NP-hard, the
relaxation obtained by allowing cycles can be solved by a pseudopolynomial
labeling algorithm (see, e.g., Desrochers and Soumis, 1988). Because of time
windows and capacity constraints, these cycles will nevertheless be of finite
length. This relaxation will of course weaken the value of the lower bound, but
cycle elimination procedures can be used to circumvent this difficulty. A proce-
dure for eliminating 2-cycles (i.e., cycles of the form (i j i)) was first proposed
by Houck et al. (1980). More recently, Irnich and Villeneuve (2003) developed
an efficient approach to forbid cycles of length greater than 2. Experiments
performed by the authors show that k-cycle elimination with k 3 can sub-
stantially improve the lower bounds. Embedding this technique within column
generation enabled the exact solution of 15 previously unsolved instances of
the Solomon benchmark set.
Recently, Chabrier (2006) proposed a modified labeling algorithm to handle
the constrained elementary shortest path problem and thus obtain improved
lower bounds. In this algorithm, both exact and heuristic dominance rules are
considered. Whenever the heuristic approach cannot find a path of negative
reduced cost, the exact but slower implementation is used. This approach has
allowed the author to find the optimal solution to 17 previously unsolved long-
horizon instances from the Solomon benchmark set.
Promising results were also reported by Danna and Le Pape (2003) who de-
veloped a cooperation scheme between column generation and local search
applied to the VRPTW. During the branch-and-price process, local search is
regularly applied from the best known integer solution. This often results in an
improved upper bound that can then be used to prune nodes in the enumer-
ation tree. Furthermore, columns associated with solutions identified during
local search can be fed into the restricted master problem. The branch-and-
price algorithm thus benefits from local search by being provided at an early
stage with high quality upper bounds, resulting in a smaller search tree. In turn,
local search benefits from branch-and-price by working with a variety of differ-
ent initial solutions, resulting in an effective form of diversification.
3.2.3 A branch-and-cut algorithm

A branch-and-cut algorithm for the VRPTW was developed by Bard et al.
(2002). As in most such algorithms for the VRP, the problem is formulated
using two-index variables xij equal to 1 if and only if a vehicle travels directly
from vertex i to vertex j. The algorithm incorporates five types of inequali-

ties: subtour elimination constraints, capacity constraints, comb inequalities,
incompatible pair inequalities, and incompatible path inequalities. At each
node of the search tree an upper bound is computed by means of the Greedy
Randomized Adaptive Search Procedure (GRASP) described by Kontoravdis
and Bard (1995).
Incompatible pair inequalities rely on the existence of vertex pairs that can-
not belong to the same vehicle route. If i and j denote two incompatible
vertices and P = (i h1 h|P |−2 j) is a path, then the following inequal-
ity is valid:
xi1 h1 + xh1 i + · · · + xh|P |−2 j + xjh|P |−2 |P | − 2 (30)
Incompatible path inequalities are similar to infeasible pair inequalities but
take arc orientations into account. If i and j are two vertices such that i cannot
precede j in a feasible vehicle route then the following inequality is valid for
any path P between i and j:
xih1 + xh1 h2 + · · · + xh|P |−2 j |P | − 2 (31)
The authors present four separation heuristics to identify violated capacity
constraints. The first is based on the computation of minimum cuts in G. The
second applies a graph shrinking heuristic similar to that proposed by Araque
et al. (1994) for the VRP. The third consists of identifying connected com-
ponents in G that do not contain the depot. Finally, the fourth is a heuristic
proposed by Kohl et al. (1999) to identify violated 2-path inequalities. Heuris-
tic separation algorithms are also described for the identification of violated
comb inequalities, incompatible path inequalities, and incompatible pair in-
equalities. The branch-and-cut algorithm of Bard, Kontoravdis, and Yu has
obtained good results on the Solomon test instances: all 50-customer instances
and several 100-customer instances were solved optimally.
3.3 Heuristics for the VRPTW
Because of the difficulty of the VRPTW and its high practical relevance,
there is a genuine need to develop fast algorithms capable of producing good
quality solutions in short computing times. Heuristics can also be used to pro-
vide upper bounds for the exact algorithms described in the previous section.
This section describes the three main classes of heuristics for the VRPTW:
construction heuristics, improvement heuristics, and metaheuristics.
3.3.1 Construction heuristics

Route construction algorithms work by inserting customers one at a time
into partial routes until a feasible solution is obtained (see Section 2.3.1).
Routes can either be constructed sequentially or in parallel. Construction al-
gorithms are mainly distinguished by the order in which customers are selected
and by the method used to determine where a customer should be inserted.
Several sequential insertion heuristics for the VRPTW were proposed

by Solomon (1987). Among these heuristics, the most efficient, called I1, con-
sists of first selecting the farthest customer from the depot as a seed customer.
The remaining customers are then inserted one at a time into the current route
by selecting at each iteration the customer that maximizes a saving measure,
taking into account the distance from the depot and the cost of insertion in
the current route. The customer is then inserted in the position minimizing
a weighted combination of extra distance and extra time required to visit the
customer. The process is repeated until all customers have been inserted or it
is no longer possible to insert additional customers without violating either the
capacity or time window constraints. At this point a new route is initialized by
selecting a new seed customer and the process repeats itself until no customers
remain.
A parallel version of this heuristic was later developed by Potvin and
Rousseau (1993) who proposed a generalized regret measure to select the next
customer for insertion. This measure reflects the cost increase likely to result
if a customer is not assigned to the route minimizing the insertion cost. Fur-
ther improvements to the sequential heuristic of Solomon (1987) were also
described by Ioannou et al. (2001) who proposed modifying the criteria for
customer selection and insertion to take into account the impact of the inser-
tion on all routed and unrouted customers.
3.3.2 Improvement heuristics

Improvement heuristics iteratively improve an initial feasible solution by
performing exchanges while maintaining feasibility. The process normally
stops when no further exchange can be made without deteriorating the solu-
tion. Improvement heuristics are mainly characterized by the type of exchanges
considered at each iteration. These define the neighborhood of a solution, i.e.,
the set of solutions reachable from the current solution by performing a single
exchange.
The first improvement heuristics for the VRPTW (see, e.g., Russell, 1977;
Baker and Schaffer, 1986) were adaptations of the 2-opt (Croes, 1958), 3-opt
(Lin, 1965), and Or-opt (Or, 1976) edge exchange mechanisms originally in-
troduced for the TSP. Because of time windows, checking whether a given
exchange maintains feasibility of the solution can be rather time consuming.
Starting with the work of Savelsbergh (1985), several attempts have been made
to develop efficient implementations of neighborhood evaluation procedures
for λ-exchanges (see also Solomon et al., 1988; Savelsbergh, 1990, 1992). A
comparison of 2-opt, 3-opt, and Or-opt exchange heuristics for the VRPTW
was performed by Potvin and Rousseau (1995) who also introduced a new ex-
change, called 2-opt*, a special case of 2-opt that maintains the orientation of
the subroutes involved in the exchange. This is accomplished by removing the
last n1 customers from a route k1 , inserting them after the first n2 customers of
a route k2 , and reconnecting the initial part of route k1 with the terminal part
of route k2 . Another exchange mechanism was described by Thompson and
Psaraftis (1993) who proposed transferring sets of customers in a cyclic fashion

between routes.
Several attempts have also been made to integrate construction and im-
provement heuristics. Russell (1995) developed a procedure that embeds route
improvement within the solution construction process. More precisely, cus-
tomers can be switched between routes, and routes can be eliminated during
the construction of the solution which is performed by a procedure similar to
that of Potvin and Rousseau (1993). More recently, Cordone and Wolfler Calvo
(2001) have proposed a composite heuristic in which a set of initial solutions is
first constructed by means of Solomon’s I1 insertion heuristic and an improve-
ment procedure is then applied to each of them. This procedure applies 2-opt
and 3-opt exchanges and attempts to reduce the number of routes by relocat-
ing customers. To escape from local optima, the heuristic alternates between
an objective minimizing total distance and an objective minimizing total route
duration (the primary objective being in both cases to minimize the number
of routes). Several deterministic local search heuristics were also proposed by
Bräysy (2002), based on a new three-phase approach. In a first phase, an ini-
tial solution is created with one of two proposed route construction heuristics
(a cheapest insertion-based heuristic with periodic route improvements and a
parallel savings heuristic). The second phase attempts to reduce the number of
routes by applying a local search operator based on ejection chains (see, e.g.,
Glover, 1992). Finally, the third phase applies Or-opt exchanges to reduce the
total length of the routes.
3.3.3 Metaheuristics
Most of the recent research on approximate algorithms for the VRPTW has
concentrated on the development of metaheuristics. Unlike classical improve-
ment methods, metaheuristics usually incorporate mechanisms to continue the
exploration of the search space after a local minimum is encountered.
Tabu search heuristics. Some of the first applications of tabu search to the
VRPTW can be attributed to Semet and Taillard (1993) and to Potvin et
al. (1996) who combined Solomon’s insertion heuristics with improvement
schemes based on vertex and chain exchange procedures.
A more sophisticated algorithm was later developed by Taillard et al. (1997)
for the VRP with soft time windows in which vehicles are allowed to arrive late
at customer locations but time window violations are penalized in the objective
function. This heuristic relies on the concept of adaptive memory introduced
by Rochat and Taillard (1995) and on the decomposition and reconstruction
procedure developed by Taillard (1993) for the classical VRP. An adaptive
memory is a pool of routes extracted from the best solutions found during the
search. This memory is first initialized with routes produced by a randomized
insertion heuristic. At each iteration of the metaheuristic, a solution is con-
structed from the routes belonging to the adaptive memory and is improved
through tabu search. The routes of the resulting solution are then stored in
the adaptive memory if this solution improves upon the worst solution already
stored. The tabu search heuristic uses an exchange operator, called CROSS ex-
change, which swaps sequences of consecutive customers between two routes.
Individual routes are also optimized by removing two edges from a route and
moving the segment between these two edges to another location within the
route. A parallel computing implementation of this approach is described in
Badeau et al. (1997).
A metaheuristic embedding reactive tabu search (see, e.g., Battiti and
Tecchiolli, 1994) within the parallel construction heuristic of Russell (1995) was
developed by Chiang and Russell (1997). In this implementation, the tabu list
length is increased if identical solutions occur too frequently and is decreased
if no feasible solution can be found. Using a variety of customer ordering
rules and criteria for measuring the best insertion points, the metaheuristic
first constructs six different initial solutions by gradually inserting customers
and repeatedly applying tabu search to the partial solutions. The best solution
obtained after this step is further improved through tabu search. Exchanges
are performed by using some of the λ-interchanges of Osman (1993): switch
a customer from one route to another and swap two customers belonging to
different routes.
More recently, a tabu search heuristic was developed by Cordeau et al.
(2001) for the VRPTW and two of its generalizations: the periodic VRPTW
and the multidepot VRPTW (see also Cordeau et al., 1997). In this heuris-
tic, an initial solution is obtained by means of a modified sweep heuristic.
Infeasible solutions are allowed during the search and violations of capacity,
duration or time window constraints are penalized in the objective function
through dynamically updated penalty factors. At each iteration of the tabu
search, a customer is removed from its current route and inserted into a dif-
ferent route by using a least cost insertion criterion. A continuous diversifica-
tion mechanism that penalizes frequently made exchanges is used to drive the
search process away from local optima. Finally, a post-optimizer based on a
specialized TSPTW heuristic (Gendreau et al., 1998) is applied to individual
routes. An improvement to this heuristic for the handling of route duration
constraints was recently described by Cordeau et al. (2004). The heuristic was
also extended by Cordeau and Laporte (2001) to handle heterogeneous vehi-
cles. Other tabu search algorithms for the VRPTW were proposed by Brandão
(1998), Schulze and Fahle (1999), and Lau et al. (2003).
Genetic algorithms. Homberger and Gehring (1999) have described two evo-
lution strategies for the VRPTW. Both are based on the (μ λ) strategy: start-
ing from a population with μ individuals, subsets of individuals are randomly
selected and recombined to yield a total of λ > μ offspring. Each offspring
is then subjected to a mutation operator, and the μ fittest are selected to
form the new population. In the first method, new individuals are generated
directly through mutations and no recombination takes place. Mutations are
obtained by performing one or several moves from the 2-opt, Or-opt, and
1-interchange families. In the second method, offspring are generated through

a two-step recombination procedure in which three individuals are involved. In
both methods, the fitness of an individual depends first on the number of vehi-
cles used, and second on the total distance traveled. Gehring and Homberger
(2002) later proposed a two-phase metaheuristic in which the first phase min-
imizes the number of vehicles through an evolution strategy, while the second
one minimizes the total distance through tabu search. A parallelization strat-
egy is also used to run several concurrent searches of the solution space with
differently configured metaheuristics cooperating through the exchange of so-
lutions.
Berger et al. (2003) have developed a genetic algorithm that concurrently
evolves two distinct populations pursuing different objectives under partial
constraint relaxation. The first population aims to minimize the total distance
traveled while the second one focuses on minimizing the violations of the time
window constraints. The maximum number of vehicles imposed in the first
population is equal to kmin whereas the second population is allowed only
kmin − 1 vehicles, where kmin refers to the number of routes in the best known
feasible solution. Whenever a new feasible solution emerges from the second
population, the first population is replaced with the second and the value of
kmin is updated accordingly. Two recombination operators and five mutation
operators are used to evolve the populations. This approach has proved to be
rather efficient in minimizing the number of vehicles used.
More recently, Mester and Bräysy (2005) have developed an iterative meta-
heuristic that combines guided local search and evolution strategies. An initial
solution is first created by an insertion heuristic. This solution is then improved
by the application of a two-stage procedure. The first stage consists of a guided
local search procedure in which 2-opt* and Or-opt exchanges are performed
together with 1-interchanges. This local search is guided by penalizing long
arcs appearing often in local minima. The second stage iteratively removes
a selected set of customers from the current solution and reinserts the re-
moved customers at minimum cost. These two stages are themselves repeated
iteratively until no further improvement can be obtained. Very good results
are reported by the authors on large-scale instances. According to Bräysy and
Gendreau (2005b), the three approaches just described seem to produce the
best results among genetic algorithms. Other such algorithms have also been
proposed by a number of researchers including Potvin and Bengio (1996),
Thangiah and Petrovic (1998), and Tan et al. (2001).
Other metaheuristics. Kontoravdis and Bard (1995) have described a two-

phase GRASP for the VRPTW. A number of routes are first initialized by
selecting seed customers. The remaining customers are then gradually inserted
in the routes by using a randomized least insertion cost procedure. During this
process, periodic attempts are made to improve the routes by local search. In
this phase certain routes may be eliminated by means of a deterministic proce-
dure that attempts to relocate the customers to a different route. To estimate
the required number of routes, the authors have proposed three lower bounds
for fleet size. Two are based on bin packing structures generated by the capac-
ity or time window constraints. The other is derived from the associated graph
created by pairs of customers having incompatible demands or time windows.
A guided local search algorithm for the VRPTW was introduced by Kilby
et al. (1998). In guided local search, the objective function is augmented with
a penalty term reflecting the proximity of the current solution value to that
of previously encountered local minima. The method is used to drive a local
search heuristic that modifies the current solution by performing one of four
moves: 2-opt exchanges within a route, switching a customer from one route
to another, exchanging customers belonging to two different routes, and swap-
ping the ends of two routes. All customers are first assigned to a virtual vehicle
and the routes for the actual vehicles are left empty. Because a penalty is as-
sociated with not visiting a customer, a feasible solution will be constructed
in the process of minimizing cost. The local search algorithm starts from this
solution and performs a series of exchanges until a local minimum is reached.
The objective function is then modified by adding a term penalizing the pres-
ence of the arcs used in this solution. The search iterates by finding new local
minima and accumulating penalties until a stopping criterion is met. This ap-
proach was later coupled with tabu search and embedded within a constraint
programming framework by De Backer et al. (2000).
Gambardella et al. (1999) have developed an ant colony optimization algo-
rithm for the VRPTW which associates an attractiveness measure to the arcs.
Artificial ants represent parallel processes whole role is to construct feasible
solutions. To deal with the hierarchical objective of first minimizing the num-
ber of vehicles and then minimizing distance, two ant colonies are used, each
dedicated to the optimization of a different objective. These colonies coop-
erate by exchanging information through pheromone updating. Whenever a
feasible solution with a smaller number of vehicles is found, both colonies are
reactivated with the reduced number of vehicles.
Bent and Van Hentenryck (2004) have described a two-stage hybrid algo-
rithm that first minimizes the number of routes by simulated annealing and
then minimizes total distance traveled by using a large neighborhood search
(Shaw, 1998) which may relocate a large number of customers. The first stage
uses a lexicographic evaluation function to minimize the number of routes,
maximize the sum of the squares of the route sizes, and minimize the minimal
delay (a measure of time window tightness) of the solution. The neighborhood
used in this stage consists of 2-opt, Or-opt, relocating, exchange, and crossover
moves. In the second stage, subsets of customers are removed from their cur-
rent route and reinserted in possibly different routes. Customers selected for
removal are randomly chosen but the algorithm favors customers that are
geographically close to each other and belong to different routes. A branch-
and-bound algorithm is then used to reinsert these customers.
A four-phase metaheuristic based on a modification of the variable neigh-
borhood search was described by Bräysy (2003). In the first phase, an initial
solution is created by using route construction heuristics. During this process,

the partial routes are periodically reoptimized through Or-opt exchanges. In
the second phase, an attempt is made to reduce the number of routes by apply-
ing a route elimination operator based on ejection chains. In the third phase,
four local search procedures embedded within a variable neighborhood search
(see, e.g., Mladenović and Hansen, 1997) are applied to reduce the total dis-
tance traveled. These procedures are based on modifications to the CROSS
exchanges of Taillard et al. (1997) and cheapest insertion heuristics. In the
fourth phase, a modified objective function considering waiting time is used
by the local search operators in the hope of further improving the solution.
More recently, a local search algorithm with restarts was also proposed by
Li and Lim (2003). This algorithm first constructs an initial solution by using
an insertion heuristic. Local search is then performed from this solution us-
ing three exchange operators that move segments of customers either between
routes or within the same route. Whenever a local minimum is reached, mul-
tiple restarts are performed starting from the best known solution, and a tabu
list is used to prevent cycling.
A large number of other metaheuristics based on various paradigms have
been described in recent years. For additional references on approximate al-
gorithms for the VRPTW as well as detailed computational experiments, the
reader is referred to recent surveys by Bräysy and Gendreau (2005a, 2005b).
4 The inventory routing problem
The Inventory Routing Problem (IRP) is an important extension of the VRP

which integrates routing decisions with inventory control. The problem arises
in environments where Vendor Managed Inventory (VMI) resupply policies
are employed. These policies allow a vendor to choose the timing and size of
deliveries. In exchange for this freedom, the vendor agrees to ensure that its
customers do not run out of product. In a more traditional relationship, where
customers call in their orders, large inefficiencies can occur due to the timing of
customers’ orders (resulting in high inventory and distribution costs). Realizing
the cost savings opportunities of vendor managed inventory policies, however,
is not a simple task, particularly with a large number and variety of customers.
The inventory routing problem achieves this goal by determining a distribution
strategy that minimizes long term distribution costs. This description of the in-
ventory routing problem focuses primarily on distribution. Inventory control
is restricted to ensuring that no stockouts occur at the customers. Inventory
control takes a more prominent role when inventory holding costs are consid-
ered. In the inventory control literature, the resulting environment is usually
referred to as a one warehouse multiretailer system.
Inventory routing problems are very different from VRPs. Vehicle routing
problems occur when customers place orders and the vendor, on any given day,
assigns the orders for that day to routes for vehicles. In IRPs, the delivery com-
pany, not the customer, decides how much to deliver to which customers each
day. There are no customer orders. Instead, the delivery company operates
under the restriction that its customers are not allowed to run out of product.
Another key difference is the planning horizon. Vehicle routing problems typ-
ically deal with a single day, the only requirement being that all orders have to
be delivered by the end of the day. Inventory routing problems are defined on
a longer horizon. Each day the delivery company makes decisions about which
customers to visit and how much to deliver to each of them, while keeping in
mind that decisions made today have an impact on what has to be done in the
future. The objective is to minimize the total cost over the planning horizon
while ensuring that no customer runs out of product.
4.1 Definition of the IRP
The deterministic IRP is concerned with the repeated distribution of a single

product from a single facility, to a set of n customers over a planning horizon
of length T , possibly infinity. Customer i consumes the product at a rate ui
(say volume per day) and can maintain a local inventory of product of up to a
maximum of Ci . The inventory at customer i is Ii0 at time 0. A fleet of m ho-
mogeneous vehicles, with capacity D, is available for the distribution of the
product. If a quantity di is delivered at customer i, the vendor earns a reward
equal to ri di . It takes a vehicle a time tij to traverse arc (i j) of the distri-
bution network and a cost cij is incurred when doing so. The objective is to
maximize the profit (revenue minus cost) over the planning horizon, without
causing stockouts at any of the customers. (Note that because product usage is
assumed to be deterministic and no stockouts are allowed, long run revenues
are fixed and the key is to reduce delivery costs.) A dispatcher has to decide
when to serve a customer, how much to deliver, and which delivery routes to
use to serve customers.
In the stochastic IRP customer demands are defined at discrete time in-
stants t by means of random variables. Let Ut = (U1t Unt ) denote the
vector of random customer demands at time t. Customer demands on differ-
ent days are independent random vectors with a joint probability distribution F
that does not change with time; that is, U0 U1 is an independent and iden-
tically distributed sequence, and F is the probability distribution of each Ut .
The probability distribution F is known to the decision maker. The vendor
can measure the inventory level Xit of each customer i at any time t. At each
time instant t, the vendor makes a decision that controls the routing of vehicles
and the replenishment of customer inventories. Because demand is uncertain,
there is often a positive probability that a customer will run out of stock, and
thus shortages cannot always be prevented. Shortages result in a penalty pi si
if the unsatisfied demand on day t at customer i is si . Unsatisfied demand is
treated as lost demand. The objective is to construct a distribution policy max-
imizing the expected discounted profit over an infinite time horizon.
4.2 Motivating example
To illustrate the difficulty of inventory routing problems, we reproduce a

small deterministic example introduced by Fisher et al. (1982) and Bell et al.
(1983). The relevant optimal tour costs can be derived from the network shown
in Figure 1, e.g., the optimal tour costs for visiting customers 1 and 2, denoted
by C12 , is equal to $210. The vehicle capacity is 5000 gallons and customer
tank capacity and usage data, in gallons, are as follows:
Customer i di ui
1 5000 1000
2 3000 3000
3 2000 2000
4 4000 1500
A simple schedule jointly replenishes customers 1 and 2 as well as customers

3 and 4 on a daily basis. This schedule is natural because customers 1 and 2
(3 and 4, respectively) are near each other. Each customer i receives a quantity
equal to its daily consumption ui . The long-run average cost of this schedule
is 420 miles per day. An improved schedule consists of a cycle that repeats
itself every two days. On the first day, one trip replenishes 3000 gallons to cus-
tomer 2 and 2000 gallons to customer 3, at a cost of 340 miles. On the second
day, two trips are made. The first trip replenishes 2000 gallons to customer 1
and 3000 gallons to customer 2. The second trip replenishes 2000 gallons to
Fig. 1. A four-customer example with distances shown on edges.

customer 3 and 3000 gallons to customer 4. Each trip costs 210 miles. The av-
erage cost of this schedule is 380 miles per day, which is nearly 10% lower than
the first schedule.
4.3 Observations on the IRP
Before describing solution approaches, we present some general obser-

vations concerning inventory routing problems and some common elements
found in most solution approaches.
The IRP is a long-term dynamic control problem which is extremely difficult
to solve. Therefore, most of the available algorithms solve only a short-term
planning problem. In early publications, it was often just a single day but later,
short-term was expanded to a few days. Two key issues need to be resolved
with such approaches: how to model the long-term effect of short-term de-
cisions, and which customers to consider in the short-term planning period.
A short-term approach that only minimizes costs has the tendency to defer
as many deliveries as possible to future planning periods, which may lead to
an undesirable situation in the future. Therefore, a proper incorporation of
the long-term objective into the short-term planning problem is essential. The
long-term effect of short-term decisions needs to capture the costs and benefits
of delivering to a customer earlier than necessary. This usually means deliver-
ing less and may lead to higher future distribution costs, but reduces the risk
of a stockout and may thus reduce future shortage costs. Decisions regard-
ing which customers need to be considered in the short-term planning period
are usually guided by some measure of the urgency to make a delivery to a
customer and the quantity that can be delivered. Usually, it is assumed that
customers considered in the short-term planning period may actually be vis-
ited, but the decision whether or not to actually visit them still has to be made.
When the short-term planning problem consists of a single day, the problem
can be viewed as an extension of the VRP and solution techniques for the
VRP can be adapted. For example, Campbell and Savelsbergh (2004c) have
discussed efficient implementations of insertion heuristics to handle situations
where the delivery amount has to lie between a lower and an upper bound,
as opposed to being fixed. In related work, Campbell and Savelsbergh (2004b)
have studied the problem of determining an optimal delivery schedule for a
route, i.e., given a sequence of customer visits, determine the timing of the
visits so as to maximize the total amount of the product delivered on the route.
Because single day approaches usually base decisions on the latest inventory
measurement and a predicted usage for that day, they avoid the difficulty of
forecasting long-term usage, which makes the problem much simpler.
4.4 Single customer analysis
It is insightful to analyze the “simple” situation in which there is only a single

customer. The results of this type of analysis can be used effectively to guide
decisions on which customers to consider in a short term planning horizon. The

material presented in this subsection is primarily based on Jaillet et al. (2002),
although much of it dates back to the work of Dror and Ball (1987). We first
consider the deterministic case. For ease of notation, let the usage rate of the
customer be u, the storage capacity of the customer be C, the initial inventory
level be I 0 , the delivery cost to the customer be c, and the vehicle capacity be Q.
It is easy to see that an optimal policy is to fill up the storage space precisely at
the time when it becomes empty. Therefore the cost vT for a planning period
of length T is

T u − I0
vT = max 0 c
min{C Q}
Now consider the stochastic case in which one decides daily whether to make
a delivery to the customer or not. The demand U between consecutive decision
points, i.e., the demand per day, is a random variable with known probabil-
ity distribution and finite mean. Assuming that the storage capacity at each
customer is at least as large as the vehicle capacity and the vendor can only
monitor the inventory in the storage space at the time of a delivery, it can be
shown that for the infinite horizon case, there exists an optimal policy that fills
up the storage space at each delivery and, following any scheduled or stock-
out delivery, plans the next delivery d days after. The optimal replenishment
interval d is a constant chosen to minimize the expected daily cost.
A d-day policy makes a delivery to the customer every d days and de-
livers as much as possible, unless a stockout occurs earlier. In such a case,
the vehicle is sent right away, which generates a cost S. It is assumed that
deliveries are instantaneous, so that no additional stockout penalties are in-
curred. Furthermore, assume that initially the storage space is full. Let pj be
the probability that a stockout first occurs on day j (1 j d − 1). Then
p = p1 + p2 + · · · + pd−1 is the probability that there is a stockout in period
[1 d − 1]. Furthermore, let vT (d) be the expected total cost of this policy
over a planning period of length T . We now have for d > T

vT (d) = pj vT −j (d) + S
1jT
and for d T

vT (d) = pj vT −j (d) + S + (1 − p) vT −d (d) + c
1jd−1
As a consequence, the expected total cost of filling up a customer’s tank

every d days over a T -day period (T d) is given by
vT (d) = α(d) + β(d)T + f (T d)

where α(d) is a constant depending only on d, f (T d) is a function that tends

to zero exponentially fast as T tends to infinity, and
pS + (1 − p)c
β(d) =
1jd jpj
with pd = 1 − p. The value β(d) is the long-run average cost per day. To
determine the best policy in this class, we need to minimize vT (d) which for
large T means finding a value of d minimizing β(d).
4.5 The two-customer IRP
When more than one customer is served, the problem becomes significantly
harder. Not only is it necessary to decide which customers to visit next, but one
must also determine how to combine them into vehicle tours, and how much to
deliver to each of them. Even if there are only two customers, these decisions
may not be easy. The material in the remainder of this section is primarily
based on Campbell et al. (1998).
If the two customers are visited together, it is intuitively clear that given
the amount delivered at the first customer, it is optimal to deliver as much
as possible at the second one (determined by the remaining amount in the
vehicle, and the remaining capacity at the second customer). Thus the problem
of deciding how much to deliver to each customer involves a single decision.
However, making that decision may not be easy, as the following two-customer
stochastic IRP example shows.
Assume the product is delivered and consumed in discrete units and that
each customer has a storage capacity of 20 units. The daily demands of the cus-
tomers are independent and identically distributed (across customers as well as
across time), with P(U = 0) = 04 and P(U = 10) = 06. The shortage penalty
is s1 = 1000 per unit at customer 1 and s2 = 1005 per unit at customer 2. The
vehicle capacity is 10 units. At the beginning of each day the inventory at the
two customers is measured, and the decision maker determines how much to
deliver to each customer. There are three possible vehicle tours, namely tours
exclusively to customers 1 and 2, of cost 120 each, and a tour to both cus-
tomers 1 and 2, of cost 180. Only one vehicle tour can be completed per day.
This situation can be modeled as an infinite horizon Markov decision process,
with the objective of minimizing the expected total discounted cost. Because of
the small size of the state space, it is possible to compute the optimal expected
value and an optimal policy.
Figure 2 shows the expected value (total discounted cost) as a function of
the amount delivered at customer 1 (and therefore also at customer 2), when
the inventory at each customer is 7, and both customers are to be visited in the
next vehicle tour (which is the optimal decision in the given state). The figure
shows that the objective function is not unimodal, with a local minimum at 3,
and a global minimum at 7. Consequently, deciding just how much to deliver
to each customer may require solving a nonlinear optimization problem with
Fig. 2. Nonunimodal objective function for determining the optimal delivery quantity.
a nonunimodal objective function. This is a hard problem for which available

search methods may not converge to an optimal solution.
4.6 Literature review on the IRP
Rather than providing a comprehensive review of the IRP literature, we dis-

cuss several research streams representing a variety of solution approaches that
have been proposed and investigated. We encourage the reader to examine the
referenced papers for more elaborate and precise coverage.
A first stream of research uses time-discretized integer programming mod-
els to determine the set of customers to be visited in a short-term planning
horizon as well as the amount of product to deliver to them. In order to accu-
rately reflect costs and time related aspects, the integer linear programs work
with a set of potential delivery routes. Fisher et al. (1982) and Bell et al. (1983)
pioneered this approach when they studied the IRP at Air Products, a pro-
ducer of industrial gases. Their formulation determines the delivery volumes
to customers, the assignment of customers to routes, the assignment of vehi-
cle to routes, and the start times of routes. The core structure of their model
is presented below, where the variable xirtv represents the amount of product
delivered to customer i ∈ N on route r ∈ R starting at time t ∈ T , the variable
yrt is 1 if route r starts at time t and 0 otherwise, Sr the set of customers visited
on route r, pi the value of delivering a unit of product to customer i, Fr the
fixed cost of executing route r, qit a lower bound on the cumulative amount
delivered to customer i by time t, and qit an upper bound on the cumulative

amount that can be delivered to customer i by time t:

maximize pi xirt − Fr yrt
r∈R t∈T i∈Sr
subject to

qit xirs qit i ∈ N t ∈ T
r∈R st

xirt Qyrt r ∈ R t ∈ T
i∈Sr
xirt 0 yrt ∈ {0 1}
In the model, the per unit value of a delivery to a customer is used to repre-
sent the effect of decisions on events occurring beyond the planning horizon of
the model. In the short-term planning period considered by the model, there
is considerable discretion in the amount of product to deliver. In the long run
this amount is determined by customer usage. Hence, each unit scheduled for
delivery to a customer within the planning horizon reduces the amount to be
delivered in the future. This is accounted for by setting the unit value to an
estimate of the cost of delivering to a customer at a point in time outside the
planning horizon of the model. Furthermore, rather than explicitly incorpo-
rating customer usage rates into the model, lower and upper bounds on the
cumulative amount to be delivered to each customer in each time period in the
planning horizon are used. It is simple, of course, to convert customer usage
rates into bounds, i.e., qit = max{0 tui −Ii0 } and qit = tui +Ci −Ii0 . Lagrangian
relaxation was a central tool in developing an effective heuristic for solving the
integer program. The size of the integer programs to be solved depends on the
chosen time discretization as well as on the size of set of routes.
Campbell and Savelsbergh (2004a) use an integer linear program with a sim-
ilar structure to determine which customers to visit in the next few days (even
though the integer program covers several weeks) and to suggest quantities and
delivery times to these customers. However, then, in a second phase, they use
modified insertion heuristics to determine the actual delivery routes and quan-
tities. The advantage of such a two-phase approach is that a higher degree of
accuracy (in terms of timing of events) can be provided in the second phase and
other practical details, such as drivers shifts, can be considered. The delivery
quantities and times specified by the solution to the integer program are good
from a long-term perspective; they may need to be modified somewhat to also
be good from a short-term perspective. When constructing the actual delivery
routes, Campbell and Savelsbergh consider delivering more to the customers
than the quantity suggested by the integer program (and slightly altering the
delivery time if needed) since this may result in higher vehicle utilization and
thus higher revenues. As in Bard et al. (1998b) their approach is embedded
into a rolling horizon framework.
A second stream of research is based on the single customer analysis pre-

sented above. This approach was pioneered by Dror et al. (1985) and Dror and
Ball (1987). The optimal replenishment day ti∗ minimizing the expected total
cost for customer i is used to determine the set of customers considered in a
short-term planning problem for the next t̄ days. If ti∗ t̄, then the customer
will be included and will definitely be visited. A value ct is computed for each
day of the planning period to reflect the expected increase in future cost if the
delivery is made on day t instead of t ∗ . If t ∗ T , i.e., the optimal replenish-
ment day falls outside the short-term planning period, then a future benefit gt
can be computed for making an early delivery to the customer on day t of the
short-term planning period. These computed values reflect the long term ef-
fects of short term decisions. An integer linear program is subsequently solved
to assign customers to a vehicle and a day, or just a day, that minimizes the sum
of these costs plus the transportation costs. (It was shown by Adelman (2004)
that this objective function is in fact equivalent to that used by Fisher et al.
(1982).) The delivery amount to a customer on a specific day is fixed and set to
the quantity needed to fill up the storage tank on that day. This leaves either
TSPs or VRPs to be solved in the second stage. These ideas are extended and
improved in Trudeau and Dror (1992). The most recent work along these lines
is that of Bard et al. (1998a, 1998b) who work with a rolling horizon approach
in which a short term planning problem is defined for a two-week period, but
only the decisions for the first week are implemented. In addition, satellite fa-
cilities are considered, i.e., locations other than the depot where vehicles can
be refilled.
A third stream of research focuses on the asymptotic analysis of delivery
policies. Anily and Federgruen (1990, 1991, 1993) analyze fixed partition poli-
cies for the IRP with an unlimited number of vehicles. Customers within the
same partition are divided into regions so as to make the demand of each re-
gion roughly equal to a vehicle load. A customer may appear in more than one
region, but then a certain percent of his demand is allocated to each region.
When one customer in a region is also visited, all other customers in that re-
gion are also visited. The authors determine lower and upper bounds on the
minimum long-run average cost over all fixed partition policies, and propose a
heuristic, called modified circular regional partitioning, to choose a fixed parti-
tion. Using similar ideas, Gallego and Simchi-Levi (1990) evaluate the long-run
effectiveness of direct deliveries (one customer on each route). Direct ship-
ping is shown to be at least 94% effective over all inventory routing strategies
whenever the minimal economic lot size is at least 71% of vehicle capacity.
This indicates that direct shipping becomes an undesirable and costly policy
when many customers require significantly less than a vehicle load, making
more complicated routing policies the appropriate choice. Another adaptation
of these ideas can be found in Bramel and Simchi-Levi (1995) who consider
a variant of the IRP in which customers can hold an unlimited amount of in-
ventory. To obtain a solution, they transform the problem into a Capacitated
Concentrator Location Problem (CCLP), solve it, transform the solution back
into a solution to the IRP, and heuristically improve it. The CCLP solution will
partition the customers into disjoint sets, which in the IRP will become the
fixed partitions. Chan et al. (1998) analyze zero-inventory ordering policies, in
which a customer’s inventory is replenished only when it has been depleted,
in combination with fixed partitioning routing policies and derive asymptotic
worst-case bounds on their performance. Gaur and Fisher (2004) consider an
IRP with time varying demand. They propose a randomized heuristic to find a
fixed partition policy with periodic deliveries. Their method was implemented
for a supermarket chain.
The fourth stream of research is based on formulating the stochastic IRP
as a Markov decision process and thus explicitly incorporating demand un-
certainty. This approach was pioneered by Minkoff (1993) who proposed a
decomposition heuristic to overcome the computational difficulties caused by
large state spaces. The heuristic solves a linear program to allocate joint trans-
portation costs to individual customers and then solves individual customer
subproblems. The value functions of the subproblems are added to approxi-
mate the value function of the original problem. The main limitation of the
proposed approach is that it assumes the availability of a set of delivery routes
with fixed delivery quantities for the customers on a route and the dispatcher
only has to decide which of the delivery routes to use at each decision point.
This limitation is removed in the work of Kleywegt et al. (2002, 2004) on ap-
proximate dynamic programming approaches and in that of Adelman (2003a,
2004) on price-directed approaches. Let state x = (x1 x2 xn ) represent
the current inventory at each customer, and let A(x) denote the set of all feasi-
ble decisions when the process is in state x. A decision a ∈ A(x) specifies which
customer inventories to replenish, how much to deliver at each customer loca-
tion, and how to combine customers into vehicle routes. Let Q be the Markov
transition function according to which transitions occur. Let g(x a) denote
the expected single stage net reward if the process is in state x at time t and
decision a ∈ A(x) is implemented. The objective is to maximize the expected
total discounted value over an infinite horizon. Let V ∗ (x) denote the optimal
expected value given that the initial state is x. Then, for any state x,

V (x) = sup g(x a) + α V ∗ (y)Q[dy|x a]
∗
(32)
a∈A(x)
∗
A policy π∗ is called optimal if V π = V ∗ , where V π represents the value
function of policy π. Solving a Markov decision process involves computing the
optimal value function V ∗ and an optimal policy π ∗ by solving the optimality
equation (32). This requires performing the following major computational
tasks:
(1) The computation of the optimal value function V ∗ . Most algorithms for
computing V ∗ involve the computation of successive approximations to
V ∗ (x) for every state x. These algorithms are practical only if the state
space is small.
(2) The estimation of the expected value (the integral in (32)). For the sto-
chastic IRP, this is a high dimensional integral. Conventional numerical
integration methods are not practical for the computation of such high-
dimensional integrals.
(3) The maximization problem on the right-hand side of (32) has to be
solved to determine the optimal decision for each state. For the sto-
chastic IRP, this means solving a complex variant of the VRP.
Kleywegt, Nori, and Savelsbergh develop approximation methods to effi-
ciently perform these computational tasks. Furthermore, their approach has
the ability to handle a finite fleet of vehicles, whereas in other Markov decision
process based approaches it is assumed that there exists an infinite fleet of ve-
hicles. The optimal value function V ∗ is approximated by V as follows. First,
the stochastic IRP is decomposed into subproblems defined for specific subsets
of customers. Each subproblem is also a Markov decision process. The subsets
of customers do not necessarily partition the set of customers, but must cover
it. The idea is to define each subproblem so that it provides an accurate rep-
resentation of the overall process as experienced by the subset of customers.
To do so, the parameters of each subproblem are determined by simulating
the overall stochastic IRP process, and by constructing simulation estimates
of subproblem parameters. Next, each subproblem is solved optimally. Finally,
for any given state x, the approximate value V (x) is determined by choosing a
partition of the customers and by setting V (x) equal to the sum of the optimal
value functions of the subproblems corresponding to the partition at states
corresponding to x. The partition is chosen to maximize V (x). Randomized
methods, incorporating variance reduction techniques to limit the required
sample size, are used to estimate the expected value on the right-hand side
of (32). Action determination involves deciding which customers to visit on a
route and how much to deliver to them. This is achieved through a heuristic.
An initial solution consisting of only direct delivery routes is constructed. This
is followed by a local search procedure that examines the benefit of adding
a customer to an existing route and modifying the delivery quantities. Using
their approach Kleywegt, Nori, and Savelsbergh can solve problems involving
up to 50 customers.
More recently, Adelman (2003a, 2004) proposed a price-directed operating
policy based on a simple economic mechanism to determine routing and de-
livery decisions for a given inventory state. Suppose management specifies a
value Vi for replenishing one unit of product at customer i. A dispatcher can
now evaluate a feasible delivery route as follows. If a set S = {s1 sn } of cus-
tomers is visited, quantities d1 dn are
delivered, and a cost cS is incurred.
Then the net value of the route equals i∈S Vi di − cS . The dispatcher has to
choose delivery routes so as to maximize his total net value without stockouts at
customers. This mechanism motivates the dispatcher to replenish a customer i
whose current inventory level is low, because then di can be set large. When
faced with the option of expanding the set S of customers to visit on a route
which does not yet use the full vehicle capacity, the dispatcher will consider
the incremental cost cS∪{k} − cS and determine if a quantity dk can be replen-
ished that is large enough to justify it, i.e., whether dk Vk − (cS∪{k} − cS ) > 0 or
dk (cS∪{k} − CS )/Vk .
The key to success in solving management’s problem is to set the Vi ’s in
such a way that the dispatcher is motivated to (ideally) minimize the long-run
time average replenishment costs. If the dispatcher’s total net value is regularly
positive, then his performance exceeds management’s long range expectations.
Management should decrease the Vi ’s to make them consistent with actual per-
formance. On the other hand, if the dispatcher’s total net value is regularly
negative, then the Vi ’s impose unrealistic expectations on the dispatcher and
management should increase them. Ideally, management should set the Vi ’s
equal to the lowest achievable marginal costs.
Starting from a dynamic control model of the inventory routing problem,
Adelman (2003b) derives the following nonlinear programming relaxation,
which computes a long run “average” solution to the inventory routing prob-
lem. Let zR be a decision variable representing the rate at which a subset R
of customers is visited together. Furthermore, let diR for all i ∈ R be a de-
cision variable representing the average quantity delivered to customer i on a
delivery route visiting subset R. This yields the following formulation:

(NLP) minimize CR zR (33)
R⊆N
subject to

diR zR = ui i ∈ N (34)
R⊆N

diR Q R ⊆ N (35)
i∈R
diR Ci R ⊆ N i ∈ R (36)
zR diR 0 R ⊆ N i ∈ R (37)
The objective (33) minimizes the long run average replenishment cost. Con-
straints (34) state that for each customer i the rate at which quantities are
replenished must equal the rate at which they are consumed. Constraints (35)
state that on average vehicle capacity is satisfied, and constraints (36) state
that on average the quantity delivered at customer i is less than the storage
capacity. Consider the following linear program

(D) maximize ui Vi (38)
i∈N
subject to

diR Vi CR R ⊆ N (39)
i∈R
with decision variables Vi . Adelman shows that this semi-infinite linear pro-
gram is dual to the nonlinear program in that there is no duality gap between
them and a version of complementary slackness holds. In (NLP) diR is a de-
cision variable while in (D) it is part of the input. The decision variables Vi at
optimality are the marginal costs associated with satisfying constraints (34) of
(NLP). This means that at optimality ui Vi is the total allocated cost rate for
replenishing customer i in an optimal solution to (NLP). Each Vi can be inter-
preted as the payment management transfers to the dispatcher for replenishing
one unit of product of customer i. Hence, the objective (38) maximizes the to-
tal transfer rate, subject to the constraint (39) that the payments can be no
larger than the cost of any replenishment. NLP can be solved effectively by
means of column generation techniques.
We have opted to focus on only a few research streams with an emphasis on
more recent efforts. However, many other researchers have contributed to the
inventory routing literature, including Federgruen and Zipkin (1984), Golden
et al. (1984), Burns et al. (1985), Larson (1988), Chien et al. (1989), Webb and
Larson (1995), Barnes-Schuster and Bassok (1997), Herer and Roundy (1997),
Viswanathan and Mathur (1997), Christiansen and Nygreen (1998a, 1998b),
Christiansen (1999), Reimann et al. (1999), Waller et al. (1999), Çetinkaya and
Lee (2000), Lau et al. (2002), Bertazzi et al. (2002), Savelsbergh and Song
(2005), and Song and Savelsbergh (2005).
5 Stochastic vehicle routing problems
Stochastic Vehicle Routing Problems (SVRPs) are extensions of the deter-

ministic VRP in which some components are random. The three most common
cases are:
(1) stochastic customers: customer i is present with probability pi and ab-
sent with probability 1 − pi ;
(2) stochastic demands (to be collected, say): the demand ξi of customer i
is a random variable;
(3) stochastic times: the service time si of customer i and the travel time tij
of edge (i j) are random variables.
Because some of the data are random it is no longer required to satisfy the
constraints for all realizations of the random variables, and new feasibility and
optimality concepts are required. With respect to their deterministic counter-
parts, SVRPs are considerably more difficult to solve. Not only is the notion of
a solution different, but some of the properties that were valid in a determin-
istic context no longer hold in the stochastic case (see, e.g., Dror et al., 1989;
Gendreau et al., 1996).
Applications of SVRP arise in a number of settings such as the delivery
of meals on wheels (Bartholdi et al., 1983) or of home heating oil (Dror
et al., 1985), sludge disposal (Larson, 1988), forklift routing in warehouses
(Bertsimas, 1992), money collection in bank branches (Lambert et al., 1993),

and general pickup and delivery operations (Hvattum et al., 2006).
Stochastic VRPs can be formulated and solved in the context of stochastic
programming: a first stage or a priori solution is computed, the realizations
of the random variables are then disclosed and, in a second stage, a recourse
or corrective action is applied to the first stage solution. The recourse action
usually generates a cost or a saving which may be taken into account when de-
signing the first stage solution. To illustrate, consider a planned vehicle route in
an SVRP with stochastic demands. Because demands are stochastic, the vehi-
cle capacity may be attained or exceeded at some customer j before the route is
completed. In this case several possible recourse policies are possible. For ex-
ample, the vehicle could return to the depot to unload and resume collections
at customer j (if the vehicle capacity was exceeded at j) or at the successor
of j on the route (if the vehicle capacity was attained exactly at j). Another
policy would be to plan preventive return trips to the depot in the hope of
avoiding higher costs at a later stage (see, e.g., Laporte and Louveaux, 1990;
Dror et al., 1993; Yang et al., 2000). A more radical policy would be to re-
optimize the route segment following j upon arrival at the depot (see, e.g.,
Bastian and Rinnooy Kan, 1992; Secomandi, 1998; Haughton, 1998, 2000). The
best choice of a recourse policy depends on the time at which information be-
comes available. For example, information about a customer demand may only
be available upon arriving at that customer or when visiting the previous cus-
tomer, thus allowing for a wider range of recourse actions, such as returning
to the depot in anticipation of failure or postponing the visit of a high demand
customer. An extensive discussion of recourse policies in the context of avail-
ability of information is provided in Dror et al. (1989).
There exist two main solution concepts in stochastic programming. In
Chance Constrained Programming (CCP) the first stage problem is solved un-
der the condition that the constraints are satisfied with some probability. For
example, one could impose a failure threshold α, i.e., planned vehicle routes
should fail with probability at most equal to α. The cost of failure is typically
disregarded in this approach. Stewart and Golden (1983) have proposed the
first CCP formulation for the VRP with stochastic demands. Using a three-
index model they showed that probabilistic constraints could be transformed
into a deterministic equivalent form. Laporte et al. (1989) later proposed a
similar transformation for a two-index model. The interest of such transfor-
mations is that the chance constrained SVRP can then be solved using any of
the algorithms available for the deterministic case. In Stochastic Programming
with Recourse (SPR) two sets of variables are used: first-stage variables char-
acterize the solution generated before the realization of the random variables,
while second-stage variables define the recourse action. The solution cost is de-
fined as the sum of the cost of the first-stage solution and that of the recourse
action. The aim of SPR is to design a first-stage solution of least expected total
cost.
Stochastic VRPs are usually modeled and solved with the framework of a
priori optimization (Bertsimas et al., 1990) or as Markov decision processes
(Dror et al., 1989). A priori optimization computes a first-stage solution of
least expected cost under a given recourse policy. The most favored a priori
optimization methodology is the integer L-shaped method (Laporte and Lou-
veaux 1993, 1998) which belongs to the same class as Benders decomposition
(Benders, 1962) and the L-shaped method for continuous stochastic program-
ming (Van Slyke and Wets, 1969). While route reoptimization is preferable to
a priori optimization from a solution cost point of view, it is computationally
more cumbersome. In contrast, a priori optimization entails solving only one
instance of an NP-hard problem and produces a more stable and predictable
solution (Bertsimas et al., 1990). It is also superior to solving a deterministic
VRP instance with expected demands (Louveaux, 1998).
The integer L-shaped method is essentially a variant of branch-and-cut. It
operates on a current problem obtained by relaxing integrality requirements
and subtour elimination constraints, and by replacing the cost of recourse Q(x)
of first-stage solution x by a lower bound θ on its value. Integrality and subtour
elimination constraints are gradually satisfied as is commonly done in branch-
and-cut algorithms for the deterministic VRP (see, e.g., Naddef and Rinaldi,
2002) while lower bounding functionals on θ, called optimality cuts, are intro-
duced into the problem at integer or fractional solutions. The method assumes
that a lower bound L on θ is available. In the following description xij is a
binary variable equal to 1 if and only if edge (i j) is used in the first stage
solution.
Step 0. Set the iteration count ν := 0 and introduce the bounding constraint
θ L into the current problem. Set the value z̄ of the best known solution
equal to ∞. At this stage, the only active node corresponds to the initial
current problem.
Step 1. Select a pendent node from the list. If none exists stop.
Step 2. Set ν := ν+1 and solve the current problem. Let (xν θν ) be an optimal
solution.
Step 3. Check for any subtour elimination constraint violation. If at least one
violation can be identified, introduce a suitable number of subtour elimina-
tion constraints into the current problem, and return to Step 2. Otherwise,
if cxν + θν z̄, fathom the current node and return to Step 1.
Step 4. If the solution is not integer, branch on a fractional variable. Append
the corresponding subproblems to the list of pendent nodes and return to
Step 1.
Step 5. Compute Q(xν ) and set z ν := cxν + Q(xν ). If z ν < z̄, set z̄ := z ν .
Step 6. If θν Q(xν ), then fathom the current node and return to Step 1.
Otherwise, impose the optimality cut

ν ν
θL+ Q x −L xij − xij + 1 (40)
1<i<jxνij =1 1<i<j
into the current problem and return to Step 2.

The optimality cut (40) uses the fact that a feasible solution is fully char-
acterized by the xij variables associated with edges nonincident to the depot.
They state that either the current solution must be maintained, in which case
the cut becomes θ Q(xν ), or a new solution must be identified, in which case
the cut becomes θ L or less and is thus redundant.
Markov decision models are defined on a state space. The system is ob-
served at various transition times corresponding to moments at which a new
customer is visited, and new decisions are taken at these moments. The state
of the system at a given transition time is described by the set of customers
already visited by the vehicle and by its current load. Because the state space is
typically very large, this approach can only be applied to relatively small scale
instances.
Heuristics for SVRPs are adaptations of methods originally designed for
the deterministic case, which can be rather intricate because of the probability
computations involved. In particular, computing the expected cost of a vehicle
route is itself complicated and it may be advisable to use approximations if such
computations are to be performed repeatedly within a search process (see, e.g.,
Gendreau et al., 1996). In what follows we study some particular classes of
SVRPs.
5.1 The vehicle routing problem with stochastic customers
In vehicle routing problems with stochastic customers each vertex i is

present with probability pi . A first-stage solution consists of a set of vehicle
routes visiting the depot and each customer exactly once. The set of absent
customers is then revealed and the second-stage solution consists of following
the first-stage routes while skipping the absent vertices. Jaillet (1985) laid the
foundations of this line of research in his study of the Traveling Salesman Prob-
lem with Stochastic Customers (TSPSC). He proposed mathematical models
and bounds, and he investigated a number of properties of the problem. For
example, he showed that the solution of a deterministic TSP can be arbitrarily
bad for the TSPSC. Also, even if the TSPSC is defined in a plane with Euclid-
ean distances, an optimal cycle may cross itself, contrary to what happens for
the TSP (Flood, 1956). Jézéquel (1985) and Rossi and Gavioli (1987) have
proposed a number of heuristics for the TSPSC based on adaptations of the
Clarke and Wright (1964) savings principle. Bertsimas (1988) and Bertsimas
and Howell (1993) later investigated further properties of the TSPSC and pro-
posed new heuristics, namely methods based on space filling curves (Bartholdi
and Platzman, 1982) and on a 2-opt edge interchange mechanism. The first
exact algorithm for the TSPSC is an integer L-shaped algorithm developed by
Laporte et al. (1994) and capable of solving instances involving up to 50 cus-
tomers. An extension of the TSPSC, called the Pickup and Delivery Traveling
Salesman Problem with Stochastic Customers (PDTSPSC), was recently in-
vestigated by Beraldi et al. (2005). In this problem there are n requests, each
consisting of a pickup location and of a delivery location, but request i only ma-
terializes with probability pi . The authors show how to efficiently implement a
low complexity interchange heuristic for this problem.
The Vehicle Routing Problem with Stochastic Customers (VRPSC) has
been mostly studied in the context of unit demand customers. As in the TSPSC,
vehicles follow the first-stage routes while skipping the absent customers and
return to the depot to unload when their capacity is reached. This problem was
first studied by Jézéquel (1985), Jaillet (1987), and Jaillet and Odoni (1988).
The latter reference states two interesting properties of the VRPSC:
(1) even if travel costs are symmetric the overall solution cost is dependent
on the direction of travel;
(2) larger vehicle capacities may yield larger solution costs.
Bertsimas’ PhD thesis (Bertsimas, 1988) is an excellent source of informa-
tion on this problem. It describes several properties, bounds and heuristics.
Waters (1989) has studied the case of general integer demands and has com-
pared three simple heuristics for this problem.
5.2 The vehicle routing problem with stochastic demands
The Vehicle Routing Problem with Stochastic Demands (VRPSD) has been
the most studied stochastic VRP. In this problem customer demands are ran-
dom and usually (but not always) independent. Tillman (1969) was probably
the first to study this problem in a multidepot context. He proposed a savings
based heuristic for its solution. The first, major study of the VRPSD can be
attributed to Golden and Stewart (1978) who presented a chance constrained
model and two recourse models. In the first of these a penalty proportional
to vehicle overcapacity is imposed; in the second, the penalty is proportional
to the expected demand in excess of the vehicle capacity. Several basic heuris-
tics were implemented and tested. Dror and Trudeau (1986) developed further
heuristics and showed that for this problem expected travel cost depends on the
direction of travel even in the symmetric case. Again, Bertsimas’ thesis (1988)
constitutes a major contribution to the study of the VRPSD. It proposes several
bounds, asymptotic results and properties for the case where ξi is equal to 1
with probability pi , and equal to 0 otherwise. In their survey paper, Dror et al.
(1989) have shown that some properties established by Jaillet (1985, 1988) and
Jaillet and Odoni (1988) extend to the VRPSC, namely (1) in an optimal solu-
tion a vehicle route may intersect itself; (2) in a Euclidean problem customers
are not necessarily visited in the order in which they appear on the convex
hull of vertices; (3) segments of an optimal route are not necessarily optimal
when considered separately. The latter property can have a major impact on
the design of a dynamic algorithm for the VRPSD.
Laporte et al. (1989) proposed a two-index chance constrained model for
the VRPSC as well as an associated branch-and-cut algorithm capable of solv-
ing instances with n 30. They also introduced a bounded penalty model in
which the cost of recourse associated with a given route cannot exceed a pre-
set proportion of the first-stage route cost. The best exact solution approach
for the VRPSD is again the integer L-shaped algorithm. Séguin (1994) and
Gendreau et al. (1995) proposed the first implementation of this method for
the solution of the VRPSD and were able to solve instances of up to 70 vertices.
The most difficult case arises when the expected filling rate f of the vehicles
is large. For example, when f = 03 instances with n = 70 can be solved
optimally, but when f = 10 instances with n = 10 can rarely be solved. Us-
ing a similar approach, Hjorring and Holt (1999) solved one-vehicle instances
(m = 1) with 095 f 105 and n = 90. Laporte et al. (2002) imposed an
additional restriction, namely that the expected demand of a route does not
exceed the vehicle capacity, and they also exploited properties of the demand
under known distributions (Poisson and normal) in the generation of lower
bounding functionals on the cost of recourse. This enabled them to solve larger
instances: for Poisson demands they solved instances with f = 09, m = 4, and
n = 25, or with m = 2 and n = 100; for normal demands they solved instances
with f = 09, m = 3, and n = 50.
Dynamic programming was applied by Secomandi (1998) to the VRP with
stochastic demands. The largest instance solved to optimality with this method
contained only 10 customers. The author also developed Neuro-Dynamic Pro-
gramming (NDP) algorithms (Secomandi, 1998, 2000, 2003) for the same prob-
lem. Neuro-dynamic programming (see, e.g., Bertsekas, 1995) is a heuristic
approach used to solve large-scale dynamic programs. It replaces the “cost-
to-go” computations by proxies based on simulation and parametric function
approximations. Secomandi (2000) compared two NDP implementations for
the VRP with stochastic demands: an optimistic approximate iteration policy
in which a neural network methodology is used to compute the approxima-
tions, and a rollout policy in which the cost-to-go is approximated by means of
a heuristic. Computational results show that the second of these two policies is
consistently and substantially superior to the first.
5.3 The vehicle routing problem with stochastic customers and demands
The VRP with stochastic customers and demands combines two difficult
cases. This problem was first mentioned by Jézéquel (1985), Jaillet (1987),
Jaillet and Odoni (1988), and was later formally defined by Bertsimas (1992).
A first-stage solution visiting all customers is first constructed, the set of
present customers is then revealed and their demand becomes known upon
the arrival of the vehicle at the customer’s location, routes are followed as
planned but absent customers are skipped and the vehicle returns to the de-
pot to unload whenever its capacity becomes attained. Benton and Rossetti
(1992) proposed an algorithm which performs route reoptimizations whenever
demands are revealed. One major difficulty in solving this problem lies in the
computation of the objective function value. Recursions, bounds, asymptotic
results, and a comparison of various reoptimization policies are provided by
Bertsimas (1992). Séguin (1994) and Gendreau et al. (1995) developed the
first exact algorithm for this problem, based again on the integer L-shaped ap-
proach. They solved instances involving up to 46 customers and concluded that
stochastic customers are a far more complicating factor than are stochastic de-
mands. In a different study, Gendreau et al. (1996) developed a tabu search
algorithm which uses an approximation of the objective function cost in order
to ease computations. On a set of 825 instances with 6 n 46 for which the
optimum was known, an optimal solution was identified in 89.45% of the cases
and the average optimality gap was 0.38%.
5.4 The vehicle routing problem with stochastic travel times
In the Vehicle Routing Problem with Stochastic Travel Times (VRPSTT)

travel times on the edges and service times at the vertices are random vari-
ables. Vehicles follow their planned routes and may incur a penalty if the route
duration exceeds a given deadline. It is natural to make this penalty propor-
tional to the elapsed route duration in excess of the deadline (Laporte et al.,
1992). Another possibility is to define a penalty proportional to the uncollected
demand within the time limit, as is the case in a money collection application
studied by Lambert et al. (1993).
The simplest case of the VRPSTT is the Traveling Salesman Problem with
Stochastic Travel Time (TSPSTT) in which there is only one vehicle. It was
first studied by Leipälä (1978) who computed the expected length of tours with
random travel times. A common version of the TSPSTT is the case where the
objective is to design a tour having the largest probability of being completed
within the deadline. Kao (1978) proposed two heuristics for this problem:
one based on dynamic programming and the other on implicit enumeration.
Sniedovich (1981) has shown that dynamic programming applied to the same
problem can be suboptimal because the monotonicity property required for
this method is not satisfied in the TSPSTT. Carraway et al. (1989) later devel-
oped a so-called generalized dynamic programming algorithm that overcomes
this difficulty. Kenyon and Morton (2003) have shown that an optimal TSPSTT
can be identified by solving a deterministic TSP in which the travel and service
times are replaced by their mean values. Verweij et al. (2003) have developed a
heuristic for the case where a penalty proportional to route duration in excess
of the deadline is incurred. The method uses a sample average approximation
technique in which a sample of instance realizations is drawn and each is solved
optimally by means of a deterministic technique. By repeating the method with
different samples a statistical estimate of the optimality gap can be computed.
Laporte et al. (1992) were probably the first to provide exact algorithms for
the VRPSTT. They formulated the chance constrained version of the problem,
and they modeled a recourse version of the problem in which a penalty propor-
tional to route duration in excess of the deadline is incurred. The problem was
solved optimally by means of an integer L-shaped algorithm for 10 n 20
and two to five travel time scenarios (each scenario corresponds to a differ-
ent travel speed for the entire network). In a more recent study, Kenyon and
Morton (2003) have investigated properties of VRPSTT solutions and have
developed bounds on the objective function value. They have developed a
heuristic that combines branch-and-cut and Monte Carlo simulation which, if
run to completion, terminates with a solution value within a preset percentage
of the optimum.
Finally, vehicle routing with stochastic travel time is frequently encountered
in pickup and delivery problems such as those arising in truckload operations.
Wang and Regan (2001) have proposed models for this class of problems under
the presence of time windows.
Acknowledgements
This work has been supported by the Canadian Natural Sciences and En-
gineering Research Council under Grants 227837-00 and OGP0039682, by
the Ministero dell’Università e della Ricerca (MIUR), and by the Consiglio
Nazionale delle Ricerche (CNR), Italy. This support is gratefully acknowl-
edged.
References
Achuthan, N.R., Caccetta, L., Hill, S.P. (1996). A new subtour elimination constraint for the vehicle
routing problem. European Journal of Operational Research 91, 573–586.
Achuthan, N.R., Caccetta, L., Hill, S.P. (2003). An improved branch and cut algorithm for the capaci-
tated vehicle routing problem. Transportation Science 37, 153–169.
Adelman, D. (2003a). Price-directed replenishment of subsets: Methodology and its application to in-
ventory routing. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management 5, 348–371.
Adelman, D. (2003b). Internal transfer pricing for a decentralized operation with a shared supplier.
Working paper, Graduate School of Business, The University of Chicago.
Adelman, D. (2004). A price-directed approach to stochastic inventory/routing. Operations Research 52,
499–514.
Agarwal, Y., Mathur, K., Salkin, H.M. (1989). A set-partitioning-based exact algorithm for the vehicle
routing problem. Networks 19, 731–749.
Altinkemer, K., Gavish, B. (1991). Parallel savings based heuristic for the delivery problem. Operations
Research 39, 456–469.
Anily, S., Federgruen, A. (1990). One warehouse multiple retailer systems with vehicle routing costs.
Management Science 36, 92–114.
Anily, S., Federgruen, A. (1991). Rejoinder to “One warehouse multiple retailer systems with vehicle
routing costs”. Management Science 37, 1497–1499.
Anily, S., Federgruen, A. (1993). Two-echelon distribution systems with vehicle routing costs and central
inventories. Operations Research 41, 37–47.
Araque, J.R., Hall, L., Magnanti, T.L. (1990). Capacitated trees, capacitated routing and associated
polyhedra. Discussion Paper 90-61, CORE, University of Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium.
Araque, J.R., Kudva, G., Morin, T., Pekny, J.F. (1994). A branch-and-cut algorithm for vehicle routing
problems. Annals of Operations Research 50, 37–59.
Augerat, P., Belenguer, J.M., Benavent, E., Corberán, A., Naddef, D., Rinaldi, G. (1995). Computa-
tional results with a branch and cut code for the capacitated vehicle routing problem. Technical
Report RR 949-M, Université Joseph Fourier, Grenoble.
Augerat, P., Belenguer, J.M., Benavent, E., Corberán, A., Naddef, D. (1999). Separating capacity in-
equalities in the CVRP using tabu search. European Journal of Operational Research 106, 546–557.
Badeau, P., Gendreau, M., Guertin, F., Potvin, J.-Y., Taillard, É.D. (1997). A parallel tabu search heuris-
tic for the vehicle routing problem with time windows. Transportation Research C 5, 109–122.
Baker, E., Schaffer, J. (1986). Computational experience with branch exchange heuristics for vehicle
routing problems with time window constraints. American Journal of Mathematical and Management
Sciences 6, 261–300.
Baldacci, R., Hadjiconstantinou, E., Mingozzi, A. (2004). An exact algorithm for the capacitated vehicle
routing problem based on a two-commodity network flow formulation. Operations Research 52, 723–
738.
Baldacci, R., Bodin, L., Mingozzi, A. (2006). The multiple disposal facilities and multiple inventory
locations rollon–rolloff vehicle routing problem. Computers & Operations Research 33, 2667–2702.
Balinski, M., Quandt, R. (1964). On an integer program for a delivery problem. Operations Research 12,
300–304.
Bard, J.F., Huang, L., Dror, M., Jaillet, P. (1998a). A branch and cut algorithm for the VRP with satellite
facilities. IIE Transactions 30, 831–834.
Bard, J.F., Huang, L., Jaillet, P., Dror, M. (1998b). A decomposition approach to the inventory routing
problem with satellite facilities. Transportation Science 32, 189–203.
Bard, J.F., Kontoravdis, G., Yu, G. (2002). A branch-and-cut procedure for the vehicle routing problem
with time windows. Transportation Science 36, 250–269.
Barnes-Schuster, D., Bassok, Y. (1997). Direct shipping and the dynamic single-depot/multi-retailer
inventory system. European Journal of Operational Research 101, 509–518.
Bartholdi, J.J., Platzman, L.K. (1982). An N log N planar traveling salesman heuristic based on space-
filling curves. Operations Research Letters 1, 121–125.
Bartholdi, J.J., Platzman, L.K., Collins, R.L., Warden, W.H. (1983). A minimal technology routing sys-
tem for meals on wheels. Interfaces 13 (3), 1–8.
Bastian, C., Rinnooy Kan, A.H.G. (1992). The stochastic vehicle routing problem revisited. European
Journal of Operational Research 56, 407–412.
Battiti, R., Tecchiolli, G. (1994). The reactive tabu search. ORSA Journal on Computing 6, 126–140.
Bean, J.C. (1994). Genetic algorithms and random keys for the sequencing and optimization. ORSA
Journal on Computing 6, 154–160.
Beasley, J.E. (1983). Route-first cluster-second methods for vehicle routing. Omega 11, 403–408.
Bell, W., Dalberto, L., Fisher, M.L., Greenfield, A., Jaikumar, R., Kedia, P., Mack, R., Prutzman, P.
(1983). Improving the distribution of industrial gases with an on-line computerized routing and
scheduling optimizer. Interfaces 13 (6), 4–23.
Benders, J.F. (1962). Partitioning procedures for solving mixed variables programming problems. Nu-
merische Mathematik 4, 238–252.
Bent, R., Van Hentenryck, P. (2004). A two-stage hybrid local search for the vehicle routing problem
with time windows. Transportation Science 38, 515–530.
Benton, W.C., Rossetti, M.D. (1992). The vehicle scheduling problem with intermittent customer de-
mands. Computers & Operations Research 19, 521–531.
Beraldi, P., Ghiani, G., Laporte, G., Musmanno, G. (2005). Efficient neighbourhood search for the
probabilistic pickup and delivery travelling salesman problem. Networks 46, 195–198.
Berger, J., Barkaoui, M. (2004). A new hybrid genetic algorithm for the capacitated vehicle routing
problem. Journal of the Operational Research Society 54, 1254–1262.
Berger, J., Barkaoui, M., Bräysy, O. (2003). A route-directed hybrid genetic approach for the vehicle
routing problem with time windows. INFOR 41, 179–194.
Bertazzi, L., Paletta, G., Speranza, M.G. (2002). Deterministic order-up-to level policies in an inventory
routing problem. Transportation Science 36, 119–132.
Bertsekas, D.P. (1995). Dynamic Programming and Optimal Control. Athena Scientific, Belmont, MA.
Bertsimas, D.J. (1988). Probabilistic combinatorial optimization problems. PhD thesis, Operations Re-
search Center, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.
Bertsimas, D.J. (1992). A vehicle routing problem with stochastic demand. Operations Research 40,
574–585.
Bertsimas, D.J., Howell, L.H. (1993). Further results on the probabilistic traveling salesman problem.
European Journal of Operational Research 65, 68–95.
Bertsimas, D.J., Simchi-Levi, D. (1996). A new generation of vehicle routing research: Robust algo-
rithms addressing uncertainty. Operations Research 44, 286–304.
Bertsimas, D.J., Jaillet, P., Odoni, A.R. (1990). A priori optimisation. Operations Research 38, 1019–
1033.
Blasum, U., Hochstättler, W. (2000). Application of the branch and cut method to the vehi-
cle routing problem. Technical Report ZPR2000-386, ZPR, Universität zu Köln. Available at
http://www.zaik.uni-koeln.de/~paper.
Bozkaya, B., Erkut, E., Laporte, G. (2003). A tabu search algorithm and adaptive memory procedure
for political districting. European Journal of Operational Research 144, 12–26.
Bramel, J., Simchi-Levi, D. (1995). A location based heuristic for general routing problems. Operations
Research 43, 649–660.
Bramel, J., Simchi-Levi, D. (1997). On the effectiveness of set covering formulations for the vehicle
routing problem with time windows. Operations Research 45, 295–301.
Bramel, J., Simchi-Levi, D. (2002). Set-covering-based algorithms for the capacitated VRP. In: Toth,
P., Vigo, D. (Eds.), The Vehicle Routing Problem. SIAM Monographs on Discrete Mathematics and
Applications. SIAM, Philadelphia, pp. 85–108.
Brandão, J. (1998). Metaheuristic for the vehicle routing problem with time windows. In: Voss, S.,
Martello, S., Osman, I.H., Roucairol, C. (Eds.), Meta-Heuristics: Advances and Trends in Local
Search Paradigms for Optimization. Kluwer Academic, Boston, pp. 19–36.
Bräysy, O. (2002). Fast local searches for the vehicle routing problem with time windows. INFOR 40,
319–330.
Bräysy, O. (2003). A reactive variable neighborhood search for the vehicle routing problem with time
windows. INFORMS Journal on Computing 15, 347–368.
Bräysy, O., Gendreau, M. (2005a). Vehicle routing problem with time windows, Part I: Route construc-
tion and local search algorithms. Transportation Science 39, 104–118.
Bräysy, O., Gendreau, M. (2005b). Vehicle routing problem with time windows, Part II: Metaheuristics.
Transportation Science 39, 119–139.
Burns, L.D., Hall, R.W., Blumenfeld, D.E., Daganzo, C.F. (1985). Distribution strategies that minimize
transportation and inventory costs. Operations Research 33, 469–490.
Campbell, A.M., Savelsbergh, M.W.P. (2004a). Delivery volume optimization. Transportation Science 38,
210–223.
Campbell, A.M., Savelsbergh, M.W.P. (2004b). A decomposition approach for the inventory-routing
problem. Transportation Science 38, 488–502.
Campbell, A.M., Savelsbergh, M.W.P. (2004c). Efficient insertion heuristics for vehicle routing and
scheduling problems. Transportation Science 38, 269–378.
Campbell, A.M., Clarke, L., Kleywegt, A.J., Savelsbergh, M.W.P. (1998). The inventory routing prob-
lem. In: Crainic, T.G., Laporte, G. (Eds.), Fleet Management and Logistics. Kluwer Academic,
Boston, pp. 95–112.
Campos, V., Corberán, A., Mota, E. (1991). Polyhedral results for a vehicle routing problem. European
Carraway, R.L., Morin, T.L., Moskowitz, H. (1989). Generalized dynamic programming for stochastic
combinatorial optimization. Operations Research 37, 819–829.
Çetinkaya, S., Lee, C.Y. (2000). Stock replenishment and shipment scheduling for vendor managed
inventory systems. Management Science 46, 217–232.
Chabrier, A. (2006). Vehicle routing problem with elementary shortest path based column generation.
Computers & Operations Research 33, 2972–2990.
Chan, L.M., Federgruen, A., Simchi-Levi, D. (1998). Probabilistic analyses and practical algorithms for
inventory-routing models. Operations Research 46, 96–106.
Chiang, W.-C., Russell, R.A. (1997). A reactive tabu search metaheuristic for the vehicle routing prob-
lem with time windows. INFORMS Journal on Computing 9, 417–430.
Chien, T., Balakrishnan, A., Wong, R. (1989). An integrated inventory allocation and vehicle routing
Christiansen, M. (1999). Decomposition of a combined inventory and time constrained ship routing
Christiansen, M., Nygreen, B. (1998a). A method for solving ship routing problems with inventory
constraints. Annals of Operations Research 81, 357–378.
Christiansen, M., Nygreen, B. (1998b). Modelling path flows for a combined ship routing and inventory
management problem. Annals of Operations Research 82, 391–412.
Christofides, N., Mingozzi, A. (1989). Vehicle routing: Practical and algorithmic aspects. In: Van Rijn,
C.F.H. (Ed.), Logistics: Where Ends Have to Meet. Pergamon, Oxford, pp. 30–48.
Christofides, N., Mingozzi, A., Toth, P. (1979). The vehicle routing problem. In: Christofides, N.,
Mingozzi, A., Toth, P., Sandi, C. (Eds.), Combinatorial Optimization. Wiley, Chichester, pp. 315–
338.
Christofides, N., Mingozzi, A., Toth, P. (1981a). Exact algorithms for the vehicle routing problem based
on the spanning tree and shortest path relaxations. Mathematical Programming 20, 255–282.
Christofides, N., Mingozzi, A., Toth, P. (1981b). State-space relaxation procedures for the computation
of bounds to routing problems. Networks 11, 145–164.
Clarke, G., Wright, J.W. (1964). Scheduling of vehicles from a central depot to a number of delivery
points. Operations Research 12, 568–581.
Cook, W., Rich, J.L. (1999). A parallel cutting-plane algorithm for the vehicle routing problem with
time windows. Technical Report TR99-04, Computational and Applied Mathematics Department,
Rice University, TX.
Cordeau, J.-F., Laporte, G. (2001). A tabu search algorithm for the site dependent vehicle routing
problem with time windows. INFOR 39, 292–298.
Cordeau, J.-F., Laporte, G. (2004). Tabu search heuristics for the vehicle routing problem. In: Rego, C.,
Alidaee, B. (Eds.), Metaheuristic Optimization via Memory and Evolution: Tabu Search and Scatter
Search. Kluwer Academic, Boston, pp. 145–163.
Cordeau, J.-F., Gendreau, M., Laporte, G. (1997). A tabu search heuristic for periodic and multi-depot
vehicle routing problems. Networks 30, 105–119.
Cordeau, J.-F., Laporte, G., Mercier, A. (2001). A unified tabu search heuristic for vehicle routing
problems with time windows. Journal of the Operational Research Society 52, 928–936.
Cordeau, J.-F., Desaulniers, G., Desrosiers, J., Solomon, M.M., Soumis, F. (2002a). VRP with Time
Windows. In: Toth, P., Vigo, D. (Eds.), The Vehicle Routing Problem. SIAM Monographs on Discrete
Mathematics and Applications. SIAM, Philadelphia, pp. 157–193.
Cordeau, J.-F., Gendreau, M., Laporte, G., Potvin, J.-Y., Semet, F. (2002b). A guide to vehicle routing
heuristics. Journal of the Operational Research Society 53, 512–522.
Cordeau, J.-F., Laporte, G., Mercier, A. (2004). An improved tabu search algorithm for the handling of
route duration constraints in vehicle routing problems with time windows. Journal of the Operational
Research Society 55, 542–546.
Cordeau, J.-F., Gendreau, M., Hertz, A., Laporte, G., Sormany, J.-S. (2005). New heuristics for the vehi-
cle routing problem. In: Langevin, A., Riopel, D. (Eds.), Logistics Systems: Design and Optimization.
Springer-Verlag, New York, pp. 279–297.
Cordone, R., Wolfler Calvo, R. (2001). A heuristic for the vehicle routing problem with time windows.
Journal of Heuristics 7, 107–129.
Cornuéjols, G., Harche, F. (1993). Polyhedral study of the capacitated vehicle routing problem. Mathe-
matical Programming 60, 21–52.
Croes, A. (1958). A method for solving traveling salesman problems. Operations Research 6, 791–812.
Danna, E., Le Pape, C. (2003). Accelerating branch-and-price with local search: A case study on the
vehicle routing problem with time windows. Technical Report 03-006, ILOG.
Dantzig, G.B., Ramser, J.M. (1959). The truck dispatching problem. Management Science 6, 81–91.
Dantzig, G.B., Wolfe, P. (1960). Decomposition principle for linear programming. Operations Re-
search 8, 101–111.
De Backer, B., Furnon, V., Kilby, P., Prosser, P., Shaw, P. (2000). Solving vehicle routing problems using
constraint programming and metaheuristics. Journal of Heuristics 6, 501–523.
Dell’Amico, M., Toth, P. (2000). Algorithms and codes for dense assignment problems: The state of the
art. Discrete Applied Mathematics 100, 17–48.
Desrochers, M., Laporte, G. (1991). Improvements and extensions to the Miller–Tucker–Zemlin sub-
tour elimination constraints. Operations Research Letters 10, 27–36.
Desrochers, M., Soumis, F. (1988). A generalized permanent labeling algorithm for the shortest path
problem with time windows. INFOR 26, 191–212.
Desrochers, M., Verhoog, T.W. (1989). A matching based savings algorithm for the vehicle routing
problem. Les Cahiers du GERAD G–89–04, HEC Montréal.
Desrochers, M., Lenstra, J.K., Savelsbergh, M.W.P., Soumis, F. (1988). Vehicle routing with time win-
dows: Optimization and approximation. In: Golden, B.L., Assad, A.A. (Eds.), Vehicle Routing:
Methods and Studies. North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp. 65–84.
Desrochers, M., Desrosiers, J., Solomon, M.M. (1992). A new optimization algorithm for the vehicle
routing problem with time windows. Operations Research 40, 342–354.
Dorigo, M., Di Caro, G., Gambardella, L.M. (1999). Ant algorithms for discrete optimization. Artificial
Life 5, 137–172.
Drezner, Z. (2003). A new genetic algorithm for the quadratic assignment problem. INFORMS Journal
on Computing 15, 320–330.
Dror, M., Ball, M.O. (1987). Inventory/routing: Reduction from an annual to a short period problem.
Naval Research Logistics Quarterly 34, 891–905.
Dror, M., Trudeau, P. (1986). Stochastic vehicle routing with modified savings algorithm. European
Journal of Operational Reserach 23, 228–235.
Dror, M., Ball, M.O., Golden, B.L. (1985). A computational comparison of algorithms for the inventory
routing problem. Annals of Operations Research 4, 3–23.
Dror, M., Laporte, G., Trudeau, P. (1989). Vehicle routing with stochastic demands: Properties and
solution frameworks. Transportation Science 23, 166–176.
Dror, M., Laporte, G., Louveaux, F.V. (1993). Vehicle routing with stochastic demands and restricted
failures. Zeitschrift für Operations Research 37, 273–283.
Dueck, G. (1990). New optimization heuristics, the great deluge algorithm and the record-to-record
travel. Technical report, IBM Germany, Heidelberg Scientific Center.
Dueck, G. (1993). New optimization heuristics: The great deluge algorithm and the record-to-record
travel. Journal of Computational Physics 104, 86–92.
Ergun, Ö., Orlin, J.B., Steele-Feldman, A. (2003). Creating very large scale neighborhoods out of
smaller ones by compounding moves: A study on the vehicle routing problem. MIT Sloan work-
ing Paper 4393-02, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.
Federgruen, A., Zipkin, P. (1984). A combined vehicle routing and inventory allocation problem. Oper-
ations Research 32, 1019–1036.
Fischetti, M., Toth, P. (1989). An additive bounding procedure for combinatorial optimization prob-
lems. Operations Research 37, 319–328.
Fischetti, M., Toth, P., Vigo, D. (1994). A branch-and-bound algorithm for the capacitated vehicle rout-
ing problem on directed graphs. Operations Research 42, 846–859.
Fisher, M.L. (1994). Optimal solution of vehicle routing problems using minimum k-trees. Operations
Research 42, 626–642.
Fisher, M.L., Jaikumar, R. (1981). A generalized assignment heuristic for the vehicle routing problem.
Networks 11, 109–124.
Fisher, M.L., Greenfield, A., Jaikumar, R., Kedia, P. (1982). Real-time scheduling of a bulk delivery
fleet: Practical application of Lagrangean relaxation. Technical report, The Wharton School, Uni-
versity of Pennsylvania.
Fisher, M.L., Jörnsten, K.O., Madsen, O.B.G. (1997). Vehicle routing with time windows – two opti-
mization algorithms. Operations Research 45, 488–492.
Flood, M.M. (1956). The travelling salesman problem. Operations Research 4, 61–75.
Foster, B.A., Ryan, D.M. (1976). An integer programming approach to the vehicle scheduling problem.
Operations Research 27, 367–384.
Fukasawa, R., Longo, H., Lysgaard, J., Poggi de Aragão, M., Reis, M., Uchoa, E., Werneck, R.F. (2006).
Robust branch-and-cut-and-price for the capacitated vehicle routing problem. Mathematical Pro-
gramming A 106, 491–511.
Gallego, G., Simchi-Levi, D. (1990). On the effectiveness of direct shipping strategy for the one-
warehouse multi-retailer r-systems. Management Science 36, 240–243.
Gambardella, L.M., Taillard, É.D., Agazzi, G. (1999). MACS-VRPTW: A multiple ant colony system
for vehicle routing problems with time windows. In: Corne, D., Dorigo, M., Glover, F. (Eds.), New
Ideas in Optimization. McGraw-Hill, London, pp. 63–76.
Gaur, V., Fisher, M.L. (2004). A periodic inventory routing problem at a supermarket chain. Operations
Research 52, 813–822.
Gehring, H., Homberger, J. (2002). Parallelization of a two-phase metaheuristic for routing problems
with time windows. Journal of Heuristics 8, 251–276.
Gendreau, M., Hertz, A., Laporte, G. (1992). New insertion and post-optimization procedures for the
traveling selesman problem. Operations Research 40, 1083–1094.
Gendreau, M., Hertz, A., Laporte, G. (1994). A tabu search heuristic for the vehicle routing problem.
Management Science 40, 1276–1290.
Gendreau, M., Laporte, G., Séguin, R. (1995). An exact algorithm for the vehicle routing problem with
stochastic customers and demands. Transportation Science 29, 143–155.
Gendreau, M., Laporte, G., Séguin, R. (1996). A tabu search algorithm for the vehicle routing problem
with stochastic demands and customers. Operations Research 44, 469–477.
Gendreau, M., Hertz, A., Laporte, G., Stan, M. (1998). A generalized insertion heuristic for the travel-
ing salesman problem with time windows. Operations Research 43, 330–335.
Gendreau, M., Laporte, G., Potvin, J.-Y. (2002). Metaheuristics for the capacitated VRP. In: Toth,
P., Vigo, D. (Eds.), The Vehicle Routing Problem. SIAM Monographs on Discrete Mathematics and
Applications. SIAM, Philadelphia, pp. 129–154.
Ghaziri, H. (1993). Algorithmes connexionistes pour l’optimisation combinatoire. Thèse de doctorat,
École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Switzerland.
Ghiani, G., Laporte, G., Semet, F. (2006). The black and white traveling salesman problem. Operations
Research 54, 366–378.
Gillett, B.E., Miller, L.R. (1974). A heuristic algorithm for the vehicle-dispatch problem. Operations
Research 21, 340–349.
Glover, F. (1992). New ejection chain and alternating path methods for traveling salesman problems.
In: Balci, O., Sharda, R., Zenios, S. (Eds.), Computer Science and Operations Research: New Devel-
opments in Their Interfaces. Pergamon, Oxford, pp. 449–509.
Golden, B.L., Stewart, W.R. (1978). Vehicle routing with probabilistic demands. In: Hogben, D., Fife,
D. (Eds.) Computer Science and Statistics: Tenth Annual Symposium on the Interface. NBS Special
Publication, vol. 503, pp. 252–259.
Golden, B.L., Magnanti, T.L., Nguyen, H.Q. (1977). Implementing vehicle routing algorithms. Net-
works 7, 113–148.
Golden, B.L., Assad, A.A., Dahl, R. (1984). Analysis of a large scale vehicle routing problem with an
inventory component. Large Scale Systems 7, 181–190.
Golden, B.L., Wasil, E.A., Kelly, J.P., Chao, I-M. (1998). Metaheuristics in vehicle routing. In: Crainic,
T.G., Laporte, G. (Eds.), Fleet Management and Logistics. Kluwer Academic, Boston, pp. 33–56.
Golden, B.L., Assad, A.A., Wasil, E.A. (2002). Routing vehicles in the real world: Applications in the
solid waste, beverage, food, dairy, and newspaper industries. In: Toth, P., Vigo, D. (Eds.), The Vehicle
Routing Problem. SIAM Monographs on Discrete Mathematics and Applications. SIAM, Philadelphia,
pp. 245–286.
Gouveia, L. (1995). A result on projection for the vehicle routing problem. Journal of Operational Re-
search Society 85, 610–624.
Hadjiconstantinou, E., Christofides, N., Mingozzi, A. (1995). A new exact algorithm for the vehicle rout-
ing problem based on q-paths and k-shortest paths relaxations. Annals of Operations Research 61,
21–43.
Haimovich, M., Rinnooy Kan, A.H.G. (1985). Bounds and heuristics for capacitated routing problems.
Mathematics of Operations Research 10, 527–542.
Haughton, M.A. (1998). The performance of route modification and demand stabilization strategies in
stochastic vehicle routing. Transportation Research 32, 551–566.
Haughton, M.A. (2000). Quantifying the benefits of route reoptimisation under stochastic customer
demands. Journal of the Operational Research Society 51, 320–332.
Held, M., Karp, R.M. (1971). The traveling salesman problem and minimum spanning trees: Part II.
Mathematical Programming 1, 6–25.
Held, M., Wolfe, P., Crowder, M.P. (1974). Validation of the subgradient optimization. Mathematical
Programming 6, 62–88.
Herer, Y., Roundy, R. (1997). Heuristics for a one-warehouse multiretailer distribution problem with
performance bounds. Operations Research 45, 102–115.
Hjorring, C., Holt, J. (1999). New optimality cuts for a single-vehicle stochastic routing problem. Annals
of Operations Research 86, 569–585.
Homberger, J., Gehring, H. (1999). Two evolutionary metaheuristics for the vehicle routing problem
with time windows. INFOR 37, 297–318.
Houck, D.J., Picard, J.-C., Queyranne, M., Vemuganti, R.R. (1980). The traveling salesman problem as
a constrained shortest path problem: Theory and computational experience. Opsearch 17, 93–109.
Hvattum, L.M., Løkketangen, A., Laporte, G. (2006). Solving a dynamic and stochastic vehicle routing
problem with a sample scenario hedging heuristic. Transportation Science, in press.
Ioannou, G., Kritikos, M., Prastacos, G. (2001). A greedy look-ahead heuristic for the vehicle routing
problem with time windows. Journal of the Operational Research Society 52, 523–537.
Irnich, S., Villeneuve, D. (2003). The shortest path problem with resource constraints and k-cycle
elimination for k 3. Technical report, Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule, Aachen,
Germany.
Jaillet, P. (1985). Probabilistic traveling salesman problem. PhD thesis, Operations Research Center,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.
Jaillet, P. (1987). Stochastic routing problems. In: Andreatta, G., Mason, F., Serafini, P. (Eds.), Stochas-
tics in Combinatorial Optimization. World Scientific, Singapore, pp. 197–213.
Jaillet, P. (1988). A priori solution of a traveling salesman problem in which a random subset of the
customers are visited. Operations Research 36, 929–936.
Jaillet, P., Odoni, A.R. (1988). The probabilistic vehicle routing problem. In: Golden, B.L., Assad, A.A.
(Eds.), Vehicle Routing: Methods and Studies. North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp. 293–318.
Jaillet, P., Bard, J.F., Huang, L., Dror, M. (2002). Delivery cost approximations for inventory routing
problems in a rolling horizon framework. Transportation Science 3, 292–300.
Jézéquel, A. (1985). Probabilistic vehicle routing problems. MSc dissertation, Department of Civil En-
gineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.
Kallehauge, B., Larsen, J., Madsen, O.B.G. (2006). Lagrangean duality applied to the vehicle routing
with time windows. Computers & Operations Research 33, 1464–1487.
Kao, E.P.C. (1978). A preference order dynamic program for a stochastic traveling salesman problem.
Kenyon, A.S., Morton, D.P. (2003). Stochastic vehicle routing with random travel times. Transportation
Science 37, 69–82.
Kilby, P.J., Prosser, P., Shaw, P. (1998). Guided local search for the vehicle routing problem with time
windows. In: Voss, S., Martello, S., Osman, I.H., Roucairol, C. (Eds.), Meta Heuristics: Advances and
Trends in Local Search Paradigms for Optimisation. Kluwer Academic, Boston, pp. 473–486.
Kindervater, G.A.P., Savelsbergh, M.W.P. (1997). Vehicle routing: Handling edge exchanges. In:
Aarts, E.H.L., Lenstra, J.K. (Eds.), Local Search in Combinatorial Optimization. Wiley, Chichester,
pp. 337–360.
Kleywegt, A.J., Nori, V., Savelsbergh, M.W.L. (2002). The stochastic inventory routing problem with
direct deliveries. Transportation Science 36, 94–118.
Kleywegt, A.J., Nori, V., Savelsbergh, M.W.L. (2004). Dynamic programming approximations for a sto-
chastic inventory routing problem. Transportation Science 38, 42–70.
Kohl, N., Madsen, O.B.G. (1997). An optimization algorithm for the vehicle routing problem with time
windows based on Lagrangean relaxation. Operations Research 45, 395–406.
Kohl, N., Desrosiers, J., Madsen, O.B.G., Solomon, M.M., Soumis, F. (1999). 2-path cuts for the vehicle
routing problem with time windows. Transportation Science 33, 101–116.
Kolen, A.W.J., Rinnooy Kan, A.H.G., Trienekens, H.W.J.M. (1987). Vehicle routing with time windows.
Kontoravdis, G., Bard, J.F. (1995). A GRASP for the vehicle routing problem with time windows. ORSA
Lambert, V., Laporte, G., Louveaux, F.V. (1993). Designing collection routes through bank branches.
Computers & Operations Research 20, 783–791.
Laporte, G., Louveaux, F.V. (1990). Formulations and bounds for the stochastic capacitated vehi-
cle routing problem with uncertain supplies. In: Gabzewicz, J., Richard, J.-F., Wolsey, L. (Eds.),
Economic Decision Making: Games, Econometrics and Optimisation. North-Holland, Amsterdam,
pp. 443–455.
Laporte, G., Louveaux, F.V. (1993). The integer L-shaped method for stochastic integer programs with
complete recourse. Operations Research Letters 13, 133–142.
Laporte, G., Louveaux, F.V. (1998). Solving stochastic routing problems with the integer L-shaped
method. In: Crainic, T.G., Laporte, G. (Eds.), Fleet Management and Logistics. Kluwer Academic,
Boston, pp. 159–167.
Laporte, G., Nobert, Y. (1987). Exact algorithms for the vehicle routing problem. Annals of Discrete
Mathematics 31, 147–184.
Laporte, G., Semet, F. (2002). Classical heuristics for the capacitated VRP. In: Toth, P., Vigo, D. (Eds.),
The Vehicle Routing Problem. SIAM Monographs on Discrete Mathematics and Applications. SIAM,
Philadelphia, pp. 109–128.
Laporte, G., Nobert, Y., Desrochers, M. (1985). Optimal routing under capacity and distance restric-
tions. Operations Research 33, 1050–1073.
Laporte, G., Mercure, H., Nobert, Y. (1986). An exact algorithm for the asymmetrical capacitated
vehicle routing problem. Networks 16, 33–46.
Laporte, G., Louveaux, F.V., Mercure, H. (1989). Models and exact solutions for a class of stochastic
location-routing problems. European Journal of Operational Research 39, 71–78.
Laporte, G., Louveaux, F.V., Mercure, H. (1992). The vehicle routing problem with stochastic travel
times. Transportation Science 26, 161–170.
Laporte, G., Louveaux, F.V., Mercure, H. (1994). A priori optimization of the probabilistic traveling
salesman problem. Operations Research 42, 543–549.
Laporte, G., Louveaux, F.V., Van hamme, L. (2002). An integer L-shaped algorithm for the capacitated
vehicle routing problem with stochastic demands. Operations Research 50, 415–423.
Larson, R.C. (1988). Transportation of sludge to the 106-mile site: An inventory routing problem for
fleet sizing and logistic system design. Transportation Science 22, 186–198.
Lau, H.C., Liu, Q., Ono, H. (2002). Integrating local search and network flow to solve the inventory
routing problem. American Association for Artificial Intelligence 2, 9–14.
Lau, H.C., Sim, M., Teo, K.M. (2003). Vehicle routing problem with time windows and a limited number
of vehicles. European Journal of Operational Research 148, 559–569.
Leipälä, T. (1978). On the solutions of stochastic traveling salesman problems. European Journal of
Operational Research 2, 291–297.
Letchford, A., Eglese, R.W., Lysgaard, J. (2002). Multistars, partial multistars and the capacitated ve-
hicle routing problem. Mathematical Programming 94, 21–40.
Li, F., Golden, B.L., Wasil, E.A. (2005). Very large-scale vehicle routing: New test problems, algorithms
and results. Computers & Operations Research 32, 1165–1179.
Li, H., Lim, A. (2003). Local search with annealing-like restarts to solve the VRPTW. European Journal
of Operational Research 150, 115–127.
Lin, S. (1965). Computer solutions of the travelling salesman problem. Bell System Technical Journal 44,
2245–2269.
Louveaux, F.V. (1998). An introduction to stochastic transportation models. In: Labbé, M., Laporte,
G., Tanczos, K., Toint, P. (Eds.), Operations Research and Decision Aid Methodologies in Traffic
and Transportation Management. NATO ASI Series F: Computer and Systems Sciences, vol. 166.
Springer-Verlag, Berlin/Heidelberg, pp. 244–263.
Lysgaard, J., Letchford, A., Eglese, R.W. (2004). A new branch-and-cut algorithm for the capacitated
vehicle routing problem. Mathematical Programming 100, 423–445.
Martinhon, C., Lucena, A., Maculan, N. (2000). A relax and cut algorithm for the vehicle routing prob-
lem. Technical Report RT-05/00, Universidade Federal Fluminense, Niterói, Brasil.
Mester, D., Bräysy, O. (2005). Active guided evolution strategies for large scale vehicle routing problem
with time windows. Computers & Operations Research 32, 1593–1614.
Miller, D.L. (1995). A matching based exact algorithm for capacitated vehicle routing problems. ORSA
Miller, D.L., Pekny, J.F. (1995). A staged primal-dual algorithm for perfect b-matching with edge ca-
pacities. ORSA Journal on Computing 7, 298–320.
Mingozzi, A., Christofides, N., Hadjiconstantinou, E. (1994). An exact algorithm for the vehicle routing
problem based on the set partitioning formulation. Technical report, Department of Mathematics,
University of Bologna, Italy.
Minkoff, A. (1993). A Markov decision model and decomposition heuristic for dynamic vehicle dis-
patching. Operations Research 41, 77–90.
Mladenović, N., Hansen, P. (1997). Variable neighborhood search. Computers & Operations Research 24,
1097–1100.
Mole, R.H., Jameson, S.R. (1976). A sequential route-building algorithm employing a generalized sav-
ings criterion. Operational Research Quarterly 27, 503–511.
Moscato, P., Cotta, C. (2003). A gentle introduction to memetic algorithms. In: Glover, F., Kochen-
berger, G.A. (Eds.), Handbook of Metaheuristics. Kluwer Academic, Boston, pp. 105–144.
Naddef, D., Rinaldi, G. (2002). Branch-and-cut algorithms for the capacitated VRP. In: Toth, P., Vigo,
D. (Eds.), The Vehicle Routing Problem. SIAM Monographs on Discrete Mathematics and Applications.
SIAM, Philadelphia, pp. 53–84.
Nelson, M.D., Nygard, K.E., Griffin, J.H., Shreve, W.E. (1985). Implementation techniques for the
vehicle routing problem. Computers & Operations Research 12, 273–283.
Or, I. (1976). Traveling salesman-type combinatorial problems and their relation to the logistics of
blood banking. PhD thesis, Department of Industrial Engineering and Management Science, North-
western University, Evanston, IL.
Osman, I.H. (1993). Metastrategy simulated annealing and tabu search algorithms for the vehicle rout-
ing problem. Annals of Operations Research 41, 421–451.
Paessens, H. (1988). The savings algorithm for the vehicle routing problem. European Journal of Oper-
ational Research 34, 336–344.
Potvin, J.-Y. (1996). Genetic algorithms for the traveling salesman problem. Annals of Operations Re-
search 63, 339–370.
Potvin, J.-Y., Bengio, S. (1996). The vehicle routing problem with time windows – Part II: Genetic
search. INFORMS Journal on Computing 8, 165–172.
Potvin, J.-Y., Rousseau, J.-M. (1993). A parallel route building algorithm for the vehicle routing and
scheduling problem with time windows. European Journal of Operational Research 66, 331–340.
Potvin, J.-Y., Rousseau, J.-M. (1995). An exchange heuristic for routing problems with time windows.
Journal of the Operational Research Society 46, 1433–1446.
Potvin, J.-Y., Kervahut, T., Garcia, B.L., Rousseau, J.-M. (1996). The vehicle routing problem with time
windows – Part I: Tabu search. INFORMS Journal on Computing 8, 158–164.
Prins, C. (2004). A simple and effective evolutionary algorithm for the vehicle routing problem. Com-
puters & Operations Research 31, 1985–2002.
Ralphs, T.K., Kopman, L., Pulleyblank, W.R., Trotter, Jr., L.E. (2003). On the capacitated vehicle
routing problem. Mathematical Programming B 94, 343–359.
Rechenberg, I. (1973). Evolutionsstrategie. Fromman-Holzboog, Stuttgart, Germany.
Rego, C. (1998). A subpath ejection method for the vehicle routing problem. Management Science 44,
1447–1459.
Rego, C., Roucairol, C. (1996). A parallel tabu search algorithm using ejection chains for the vehi-
cle routing problem. In: Osman, I.H., Kelly, J.P. (Eds.), Meta-Heuristics: Theory and Applications.
Kluwer Academic, Boston, pp. 661–675.
Reimann, M., Rubio, R., Wein, L.M. (1999). Heavy traffic analysis of the dynamic stochastic inventory-
routing problem. Transportation Science 33, 361–380.
Reimann, M., Doerner, K., Hartl, R.F. (2004). D-ants: Savings based ants divide and conquer for the
vehicle routing problem. Computers & Operations Research 31, 563–591.
Renaud, J., Boctor, F.F., Laporte, G. (1996a). A fast composite heuristic for the symmetric traveling
salesman problem. INFORMS Journal on Computing 8, 134–143.
Renaud, J., Boctor, F.F., Laporte, G. (1996b). An improved petal heuristic for the vehicle routing prob-
lem. Journal of the Operational Research Society 47, 329–336.
Rochat, Y., Taillard, É.D. (1995). Probabilistic diversification and intensification in local search for
vehicle routing. Journal of Heuristics 1, 147–167.
Rossi, F.A., Gavioli, I. (1987). Aspects of heuristic methods in the “Probabilistic traveling salesman
problem”. In: Andreatta, G., Mason, F., Serafini, P. (Eds.), Stochastics in Combinatorial Optimiza-
tion. World Scientific, Singapore, pp. 214–227.
Russell, R.A. (1977). An effective heuristic for the M-tour traveling salesman problem with some side
conditions. Operations Research 25, 517–524.
Russell, R.A. (1995). Hybrid heuristics for the vehicle routing problem with time windows. Transporta-
tion Science 29, 156–166.
Ryan, D.M., Hjorring, C., Glover, F. (1993). Extensions of the petal method for vehicle routing. Journal
of Operational Research Society 44, 289–296.
Savelsbergh, M.W.P. (1985). Local search in routing problems with time windows. Annals of Operations
Research 4, 285–305.
Savelsbergh, M.W.P. (1990). En efficient implementation of local search algorithms for constrained
routing problems. European Journal of Operational Research 47, 75–85.
Savelsbergh, M.W.P. (1992). The vehicle routing problem with time windows: Minimizing route dura-
tion. ORSA Journal on Computing 4, 146–154.
Savelsbergh, M.W.P., Song, J.-H. (2005). Inventory routing with continuous moves. Computers & Oper-
ations Research, in press.
Schulze, J., Fahle, T. (1999). A parallel algorithm for the vehicle routing problem with time window
constraints. Annals of Operations Research 86, 585–607.
Secomandi, N. (1998). Exact and heuristic dynamic programming algorithms for the vehicle routing
problem with stochastic demands. PhD dissertation, Faculty of the College of Business Administra-
tion, University of Houston, TX.
Secomandi, N. (2000). Comparing neuro-dynamic programming algorithms for the vehicle routing
problem with stochastic demands. Computers & Operations Research 27, 1201–1225.
Secomandi, N. (2003). Analysis of a rollout approach to sequencing problems with stochastic routing
applications. Journal of Heuristics 9, 321–352.
Séguin, R. (1994). Problèmes stochastiques de tournées de véhicules. PhD thesis, Département
d’informatique et de recherche opérationnelle, Université de Montréal, Canada.
Semet, F., Taillard, É.D. (1993). Solving real-life vehicle routing problems efficiently using tabu search.
Annals of Operations Research 41, 469–488.
Shaw, P. (1998). Using constraint programming and local search methods to solve vehicle routing
problems. In: Maher, M., Puget, J.-F. (Eds.), Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming.
Springer-Verlag, New York, pp. 417–431.
Sniedovich, M. (1981). Analysis of a preference order traveling salesman problem. Operations Re-
search 29, 1234–1237.
Solomon, M.M. (1987). Algorithms for the vehicle routing and scheduling problems with time window
constraints. Operations Research 35, 254–265.
Solomon, M.M., Baker, E.K., Schaffer, J.R. (1988). Vehicle routing and scheduling problems with time
window constraints: Efficient implementations of solution improvement procedures. In: Golden,
B.L., Assad, A.A. (Eds.), Vehicle Routing: Methods and Studies. North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp. 85–
106.
Song, J.-H., Savelsbergh, M.W.P. (2005). Performance measurement for inventory routing. Transporta-
tion Science, in press.
Stewart, W.R., Golden, B.L. (1983). Stochastic vehicle routing: A comprehensive approach. European
Taillard, É.D. (1993). Parallel iterative search methods for vehicle routing problems. Networks 23, 661–
673.
Taillard, É.D., Badeau, P., Gendreau, M., Guertin, F., Potvin, J.-Y. (1997). A tabu search heuristic for
the vehicle routing problem with soft time windows. Transportation Science 31, 170–186.
Tan, K.C., Lee, L.H., Ou, K. (2001). Hybrid genetic algorithms in solving vehicle routing problems with
time window constraints. Asia-Pacific Journal of Operational Research 18, 170–186.
Tarantilis, C.-D., Kiranoudis, C.T. (2002). Bone route: Adaptive memory method for effective fleet
management. Annals of Operations Research 115, 227–241.
Thangiah, S.R., Petrovic, P. (1998). Introduction to genetic heuristics and vehicle routing problems
with complex constraints. In: Advances in Computational and Stochastic Optimization, Logic Pro-
gramming, and Heuristic Search. Operations Research/Computer Science Interfaces, vol. 9. Kluwer
Academic, Boston, pp. 253–286.
Thompson, P.M., Psaraftis, H.N. (1993). Cyclic transfer algorithms for multi-vehicle routing and
scheduling problems. Operations Research 41, 935–946.
Tillman, F. (1969). The multiple terminal delivery problem with probabilistic demands. Transportation
Science 3, 192–204.
Toth, P., Vigo, D. (1995). An exact algorithm for the capacitated shortest spanning arborescence. Annals
of Operations Research 61, 121–142.
Toth, P., Vigo, D. (1997). An exact algorithm for the vehicle routing problem with backhauls. Trans-
portation Science 31, 372–385.
Toth, P., Vigo, D. (1998). Exact algorithms for vehicle routing. In: Crainic, T., Laporte, G. (Eds.), Fleet
Management and Logistics. Kluwer Academic, Boston, pp. 1–31.
Toth, P., Vigo, D. (Eds.) (2002a). The Vehicle Routing Problem. SIAM Monographs on Discrete Mathe-
matics and Applications. SIAM, Philadelphia.
Toth, P., Vigo, D. (2002b). An overview of vehicle routing problems. In: Toth, P., Vigo, D. (Eds.),
The Vehicle Routing Problem. SIAM Monographs on Discrete Mathematics and Applications. SIAM,
Philadelphia, pp. 1–26.
Toth, P., Vigo, D. (2002c). Branch-and-bound algorithms for the capacitated VRP. In: Toth, P., Vigo, D.
(Eds.), The Vehicle Routing Problem. SIAM Monographs on Discrete Mathematics and Applications.
SIAM, Philadelphia, pp. 29–51.
Toth, P., Vigo, D. (2002d). Models, relaxations and exact approaches for the capacitated vehicle routing
problem. Discrete Applied Mathematics 123, 487–512.
Toth, P., Vigo, D. (2003). The granular tabu search and its application to the vehicle routing problem.
INFORMS Journal on Computing 15, 333–346.
Trudeau, P., Dror, M. (1992). Stochastic inventory routing: Route design with stockouts and route fail-
ures. Transportation Science 26, 171–184.
Van Breedam, A. (1994). An analysis of the behavior of heuristics for the vehicle routing problem for
a selection of problems with vehicle-related, customer-related, and time-related constraints. PhD
dissertation, University of Antwerp, Belgium.
Van Slyke, R., Wets, R.J.-B. (1969). L-shaped programs with applications to optimal control and sto-
chastic programming. SIAM Journal of Applied Mathematics 17, 638–653.
Verweij, B., Ahmed, S., Kleywegt, A.J., Nemhauser, G.L., Shapiro, A. (2003). The sample average ap-
proximation method applied to stochastic routing problems: A computational study. Computational
Optimization and Applications 24, 289–333.
Vigo, D. (1996). A heuristic algorithm for the asymmetric capacitated vehicle routing problem. Euro-
pean Journal of Operational Research 89, 108–126.
Viswanathan, S., Mathur, K. (1997). Integrating routing and inventory decisions in one-warehouse mul-
tiretailer multiproduct distribution systems. Management Science 43, 294–312.
Volgenant, A., Jonker, R. (1983). The symmetric traveling salesman problem and edge exchange in
minimal 1-trees. European Journal of Operational Research 12, 395–403.
Voudouris, C. (1997). Guided local search for combinatorial problems. Dissertation, University of Es-
sex, United Kingdom.
Waller, M., Johnson, M.E., Davis, T. (1999). Vendor-managed inventory in the retail supply chain. Jour-
nal of Business Logistics 20, 183–203.
Wang, X., Regan, A.C. (2001). Assignment models for local truckload trucking problems with stochastic
service times and time window constraints. Transportation Research Record 1171, 61–68.
Wark, P., Holt, J. (1994). A repeated matching heuristic for the vehicle routing problem. Journal of
Operational Research Society 45, 1156–1167.
Waters, C.D.J. (1989). Vehicle-scheduling problems with uncertainty and omitted customers. Journal of
the Operational Research Society 40, 1099–1108.
Webb, R., Larson, R. (1995). Period and phase of customer replenishment: A new approach to the
strategic inventory/routing problem. European Journal of Operational Research 85, 132–148.
Willard, J.A.G. (1989). Vehicle routing using r-optimal tabu search. MSc dissertation, The Management
School, Imperial College, London.
Wren, A. (1971). Computers in Transport Planning and Operation. Ian Allan, London.
Wren, A., Holliday, A. (1972). Computer scheduling of vehicles from one or more depots to a number
of delivery points. Operational Research Quarterly 23, 333–344.
Xu, J., Kelly, J.P. (1996). A network flow-based tabu search heuristic for the vehicle routing problem.
Transportation Science 30, 379–393.
Yang, W.H., Mathur, K., Ballou, R.H. (2000). Stochastic vehicle routing with restocking. Transportation
Science 34, 99–112.

Chapitre 6 - VRP

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chapitre 6 - VRP

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chapitre 6 - VRP

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

C. Barnhart and G. Laporte (Eds.), Handbook in OR & MS, Vol.

Martin W.P. Savelsbergh

The vehicle routing problem lies at the heart of distribution management. It

2 The classical vehicle routing problem

The symmetric VRP is defined on a complete undirected graph G = (V E).

i j ∈ V i = j} is an arc set. In this case a circuit (directed cycle) is associated

solution. The model is:

2.2 Exact algorithms for the CVRP

2.2.1 Branch-and-bound and set partitioning based algorithms

2.2.2 Branch-and-cut algorithms

several CVRP instances containing up to 134 customers. Ralphs et al. (2003)

2.3 Heuristics for the VRP

of available vehicles. However, it should be observed that many of the pro-

2.3.1 Classical heuristics

Route construction heuristics. Route construction methods were among the

(1994) who proposed to implement route merges by using a matching algo-

Two-phase heuristics. Two-phase methods are based on the decomposition of

(1979) in which the set of routes is determined through an adaptation of an ex-

where pt is a decreasing function of t and of f (x) − f (xt ). This probability is

be assigned a higher probability of being selected if it has previously led to a

Local search heuristics. A limited number of simulated annealing heuristics

a continuous diversification mechanism. During the course of the search in-

Population search heuristics. The Adaptive Memory Procedure (AMP) put

Learning mechanisms. A limited number of heuristics based on learning

Computational comparison of metaheuristics. Cordeau et al. (2005) provide

3 The vehicle routing problem with time windows

The Vehicle Routing Problem with Time Windows (VRPTW) is an impor-

3.1 Formulation of the VRPTW

The VRPTW can be defined on a directed graph G = (V A), where

xkij ∈ {0 1} k ∈ K (i j) ∈ A (19)

3.2 Exact algorithms for the VRPTW

As for most other vehicle routing problems, it is difficult to solve the

3.2.1 Lagrangian relaxation based algorithms

as mentioned above, the LP relaxation of formulation (11)–(19) provides a

These constraints are relaxed in a Lagrangian fashion so that the resulting

subject to constraints (13)–(19).

Kallehauge et al. (2006) have developed a stabilized cutting-plane algorithm

3.2.2 Column generation algorithms

where i ∈ N, N  ⊆ δ+ (i), and K  ⊆ K. Forcing this sum to be equal to 1

κ = 2. Determining whether κ(S) = 1 for a particular subset S can be achieved

3.2.3 A branch-and-cut algorithm

from vertex i to vertex j. The algorithm incorporates five types of inequali-

3.3 Heuristics for the VRPTW

3.3.1 Construction heuristics

Several sequential insertion heuristics for the VRPTW were proposed

3.3.2 Improvement heuristics

Psaraftis (1993) who proposed transferring sets of customers in a cyclic fashion

1-interchange families. In the second method, offspring are generated through

Other metaheuristics. Kontoravdis and Bard (1995) have described a two-

solution is created by using route construction heuristics. During this process,

4 The inventory routing problem

The Inventory Routing Problem (IRP) is an important extension of the VRP

4.1 Definition of the IRP

The deterministic IRP is concerned with the repeated distribution of a single

4.2 Motivating example

To illustrate the difficulty of inventory routing problems, we reproduce a

A simple schedule jointly replenishes customers 1 and 2 as well as customers

Fig. 1. A four-customer example with distances shown on edges.

4.3 Observations on the IRP

Before describing solution approaches, we present some general obser-

where i ∈ N, N ⊆ δ+ (i), and K ⊆ K. Forcing this sum to be equal to 1