2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.cie.2017.07.017
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Simple heuristic for the strategic supply chain design of large-scale networks: A Brazilian case study

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 37 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…We use the arc-flow MILP model from Farias et al (2017), which is presented here for the sake of completeness. Constraints are imposed on the raw materials supply, production capacity, DC capacity, and demand of CZs.…”
Section: Formulationmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…We use the arc-flow MILP model from Farias et al (2017), which is presented here for the sake of completeness. Constraints are imposed on the raw materials supply, production capacity, DC capacity, and demand of CZs.…”
Section: Formulationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, due to the complexity of the problem, the previously mentioned solution methods were only able to solve instances with very limited number of elements in the network, using artifices such as product aggregation to solve real-world problems. Farias et al (2017) pointed out this issue and developed a multi-start based heuristic to solve large instances of the problem. Although the results were quite impressive in terms of the dimensions of the solved instances, the developed method requires intensive experiments to set up important parameters to obtain good solutions for each different configurations of the problem instances, in terms of the number of products, CZs, and DCs.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Network optimization models frequently exclude inventory decisions and costs [1]. Several works that deal with network design do not consider inventory holding costs for decision making [2,3].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%