skip to main content
research-article

Adaptive Behavior Modeling in Logistic Systems with Agents and Dynamic Graphs

Authors Info & Claims
Published:25 March 2019Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Inside a logistic system, actors of the logistics have to interact to manage a coherent flow of goods. They also must deal with the constraints of their environment. The article’s first goal is to study how macro properties (such as global performance) emerge from the dynamic and local behaviors of actors and the structure of the territory. The second goal is to understand which local parameters affect these macro properties. A multi-scale approach made of an agent-based model coupled with dynamic graphs describes the system’s components, including actors and the transportation network. Adaptive behaviors are implemented in this model (with data about the Seine axis) to highlight the system’s dynamics. Agent strategies are evolving according to traffic dynamics and disruptions. This logistic system simulator has the capacity to exhibit large-scale evolution of territorial behavior and efficiency face to various scenarios of local agent behaviors.

References

  1. M. Agrebi, M. Abed, and M. N. Omri. 2015. Urban distribution centers’ location selection’s problem: A survey. In 4th International Conference on Advanced Logistics and Transport (ICALT’15). IEEE, 246--251.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. R. J. Allan. 2010. Survey of agent based modelling and simulation tools. Science and Technology Facilities Council.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Moshe Ben-Akiva and Gerard de Jong. 2013. The aggregate-disaggregate-aggregate (ADA) freight model system. In Freight Transport Modelling. 1st ed., Moshe Ben Akiva, Hilde Meersman, and Eddy van de Voorde (Eds.). Emerald, Bingley, United Kingdom, 69--90.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Arnaud Casteigts, Paola Flocchini, Walter Quattrociocchi, and Nicola Santoro. 2011. Time-varying graphs and dynamic networks. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Ad-hoc, Mobile, and Wireless Networks (ADHOC-NOW’11), Paderborn, Germany, July 18-20, 2011. Springer, Berlin,346--359. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Rinaldo A. Cavalcante and Matthew J. Roorda. 2013. Freight market interactions simulation (FREMIS): An agent-based modeling framework. Procedia Computer Science 19 (2013), 867--873. The 4th International Conference on Ambient Systems, Networks and Technologies (ANT 2013), the 3rd International Conference on Sustainable Energy Information Technology (SEIT-2013).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Thomas Y. Choi, Kevin J. Dooley, and Manus Rungtusanatham. 2001. Supply networks and complex adaptive systems: Control versus emergence. Journal of Operations Management 19, 3 (2001), 351--366.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Joseph Y. J. Chow, Choon Heon Yang, and Amelia C. Regan. 2010. State-of-the art of freight forecast modeling: Lessons learned and the road ahead. Transportation 37, 6 (2010), 1011--1030.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. A. Colorni, Marco Dorigo, and Vittorio Maniezzo. 1992. Distributed optimization by ant colonies. In Towards a Practice of Autonomous Systems: Proceedings of the First European Conference on Artificial Life, F. J. Varela and P. Bourgine (Eds.). MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 134--142.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Corinna Cortes, Daryl Pregibon, Chris Volinsky, and AT8T Shannon Labs. 2003. Computational methods for dynamic graphs. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics 12 (2003), 950--970.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Pablo Cortés, Jesús Muñuzuri, J. Nicolás Ibáñez, and José Guadix. 2007. Simulation of freight traffic in the Seville inland port. Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory 15, 3 (2007), 256--271.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Gerard de Jong and Moshe Ben-Akiva. 2007. A micro-simulation model of shipment size and transport chain choice. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 41, 9 (2007), 950--965. Part of Special Issue: Behavioural Insights into the Modelling of Freight Transportation and Distribution Systems.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Peter W. De Langen, Jan C. Fransoo, and Ben van Rooy. 2013. Business models and network design in hinterland transport. In Handbook of Global Logistics, James H. Bookbinder (Ed.). International Series in Operations Research and Management Science, Vol. 181. Springer, New York, 367--389.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Thibaut Démare, Stefan Balev, Cyrille Bertelle, Antoine Dutot, Dominique Fournier, and Eric Sanlaville. 2017. Effects of ports attractiveness on logistic flows in a competition context. In IPaSPort’17 International Conference. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/31668784_Effects_of_Port_Attractiveness_on_Logistic_Flows_in_a_Competition_Context.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Tufan Demirel, Nihan Çetin Demirel, and Cengiz Kahraman. 2010. Multi-criteria warehouse location selection using Choquet integral. Expert Systems with Applications 37, 5 (2010), 3943--3952. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Marco Dorigo. 1992. Optimization, Learning and Natural Algorithms. Ph.D. Dissertation. Politecnico di Milano, Italy.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Antoine Dutot, Frédéric Guinand, Damien Olivier, and Yoann Pigné. 2007. GraphStream: A tool for bridging the gap between complex systems and dynamic graphs. In Emergent Properties in Natural and Artificial Complex Systems. Satellite Conference within the 4th European Conference on Complex Systems (ECCS’07). Dresden, Germany.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. A. Ferreira. 2002. On models and algorithms for dynamic communication networks: The case for evolving graphs. In Rencontres Francophones Sur Les Aspects Algorithmiques Des Telecommunications (ALGOTEL’02). Mèze, France.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Arnaud Grignard, Patrick Taillandier, Benoit Gaudou, DucAn Vo, Nghi Quang Huynh, and Alexis Drogoul. 2013. GAMA 1.6: Advancing the art of complex agent-based modeling and simulation. In PRIMA 2013: Principles and Practice of Multi-Agent Systems, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 8291. Guido Boella, Edith Elkind, Bastin Tony Roy Savarimuthu, Frank Dignum, and Martin K. Purvis (Eds.). Springer, Berlin, 117--131.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. F. Harary and G. Gupta. 1997. Dynamic graph models. Mathematical and Computer Modelling 25, 7 (1997), 79--87. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Johan Holmgren, Paul Davidsson, Jan A. Persson, and Linda Ramstedt. 2012. TAPAS: A multi-agent-based model for simulation of transport chains. Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory 23 (2012), 1--18.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. David L. Huff. 1964. Defining and estimating a trading area. Journal of Marketing 28, 3 (1964), 34--38.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Jayanth Jayaram and Keah-Choon Tan. 2010. Supply chain integration with third-party logistics providers. International Journal of Production Economics 125, 2 (2010), 262--271.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Y. Jin, I. Williams, and M. Shahkarami. 2005. Integrated Regional Economic and Freight Logistics Modelling: Results from a Model for the Trans-Pennine Corridor, UK. In Proceedings of European Transport Conference, Strasbourg, France 18-20 September 2005 - Transport Policy And Operations - Freight And Logistics - Freight Modelling I. 24 pages.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Laurent Lévêque and Arnaud Serry. 2014. Maritime interface and metropolitan interface: Questions about the logistic integration of the Seine axis. In Transport Research Arena. Paris.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Qiong Liu, Chaoyong Zhang, Keren Zhu, and Yunqing Rao. 2014. Novel multi-objective resource allocation and activity scheduling for fourth party logistics. Computers and Operations Research 44, 0 (2014), 42--51. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Hedwig Hildegard Maurer. 2008. Development of an integrated model for estimating emissions from freight transport. Ph.D. Dissertation. The University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Francesco Parola and Anna Sciomachen. 2005. Intermodal container flows in a port system network: Analysis of possible growths via simulation models. International Journal of Production Economics 97, 1 (2005), 75--88.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. Steven F. Railsback, Steven L. Lytinen, and Stephen K. Jackson. 2006. Agent-based simulation platforms: Review and development recommendations. SIMULATION 82, 9 (Jan. 2006), 609--623. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Jean-Paul Rodrigue. 2012. The geography of global supply chains: Evidence from third-party logistics. Journal of Supply Chain Management 48, 3 (2012), 15--23.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Matthew J. Roorda, Rinaldo Cavalcante, Stephanie McCabe, and Helen Kwan. 2010. A conceptual framework for agent-based modelling of logistics services. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review 46, 1 (2010), 18--31.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. Amir Samimi, Abolfazl Mohammadian, and Kazuya Kawamura. 2010. A behavioral freight movement microsimulation model: Method and data. Transportation Letters 2, 1 (2010), 53--62.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  32. Amir Samimi, Abolfazl Mohammadian, Kazuya Kawamura, and Zahra Pourabdollahi. 2014. An activity-based freight mode choice microsimulation model. Transportation Letters 6, 3 (2014), 142--151.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. Guilhelm Savin. 2014. Intelligence en essaim pour la distribution de simulations dans un écosystème computationnel. Ph.D. Dissertation. Université du Havre, Le Havre, France.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Alfonso Shimbel. 1953. Structural parameters of communication networks. The Bulletin of Mathematical Biophysics 15, 4 (1953), 501--507.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. Amit Surana, Soundar Kumara, Mark Greaves, and Usha Nandini Raghavan. 2005. Supply-chain networks: A complex adaptive systems perspective. International Journal of Production Research 43, 20 (2005), 4235--4265.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Patrick Taillandier, Duc-An Vo, Edouard Amouroux, and Alexis Drogoul. 2012. GAMA: A simulation platform that integrates geographical information data, agent-based modeling and multi-scale control. In Principles and Practice of Multi-Agent Systems, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Nirmit Desai, Alan Liu, and Michael Winikoff (Eds.), Vol. 7057. Springer, Berlin, 242--258. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Lorant Tavasszy. 2006. Freight modeling: An overview of international experiences. Freight Demand Modeling: Tools For Public-Sector Decision Making (2006), 47.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. L. A. Tavasszy, C. E. Cornelissen, and E. Huijsman. 2001. Forecasting the impacts of changing patterns of physical distribution on freight transport in Europe. In the 9th World Conference on Transport Research. Elsevier.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Lóránt A. Tavasszy, Ben Smeenk, and Cees J. Ruijgrok. 1998. A DSS for modelling logistic chains in freight transport policy analysis. International Transactions in Operational Research 5, 6 (1998), 447--459.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  40. G. Teresa and G. Evangelos. 2015. Importance of logistics services attributes influencing customer satisfaction. In 4th International Conference on Advanced Logistics and Transport (ICALT’15). 53--58.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Wisinee Wisetjindawat and Kazushi Sano. 2003. A behavioral modeling in micro-simulation for urban freight transportation. Journal of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies 5 (2003), 2193--2208.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Wisinee Wisetjindawat, Kazushi Sano, and Shoji Matsumoto. 2006. Commodity distribution model incorporating spatial interactions for urban freight movement. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 1966 (2006), 41--50.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  43. Barry Zondag, Pietro Bucci, Padideh Gützkow, and Gerard de Jong. 2010. Port competition modeling including maritime, port, and hinterland characteristics. Maritime Policy 8 Management 37, 3 (2010), 179--194.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. E. Šrámková, E. Niko, P. Kolář, and J. Huňak. 2015. Decision-making factors leading to customers’ satisfaction in container transportation. In 4th International Conference on Advanced Logistics and Transport (ICALT). 105--110.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Adaptive Behavior Modeling in Logistic Systems with Agents and Dynamic Graphs

            Recommendations

            Comments

            Login options

            Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

            Sign in

            Full Access

            PDF Format

            View or Download as a PDF file.

            PDF

            eReader

            View online with eReader.

            eReader

            HTML Format

            View this article in HTML Format .

            View HTML Format
            About Cookies On This Site

            We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

            Learn more

            Got it!