1. NCCU Academic Hub
  2. 學術產出
  3. 商學院
  4. 學位論文
  5. Item

學術產出-學位論文

文章檢視/開啟

書目匯出

Google ScholarTM

政大圖書館

引文資訊

TAIR相關學術產出

題名 汽車貨運業者車輛資源不足之車輛途程規劃及業務委外評選模式
Vehicle routing problem and the selection of outsourcing forwarder when transport vehicles are insufficient
作者 謝宛汝
貢獻者 林我聰
謝宛汝
關鍵詞 禁忌搜尋法
網路程序分析法
VIKOR排序法
自有車輛配送或委外
Tabu Search
ANP
VIKOR
VRPPC
日期 2010
上傳時間 4-九月-2013 16:57:44 (UTC+8)
摘要 本研究以單一汽車貨運業者的角度，評估當運輸需求大於自有車輛服務能力時，考量車種、時窗、貨物量等因素，以最小化成本為目標進行途程規劃，利用運輸水平整合、協同合作的概念，將未能滿足之需求任務委外給其他同業進行。
本研究主要分為兩階段，第一階段先確認是否需要委外，以禁忌搜尋法找出最節省成本之配送途程以及委外任務，解決業者選擇以自有車輛運送或委外給其他運輸業者服務的問題；而第二階段則是在確定委外的任務後，決定委外的對象，不僅考量對方出價，也評估對方的營運能力、商譽、風險管理、服務品質等因素，建構一多準則決策模式，透過網路程序分析法(ANP)決定評選準則權重，再利用VIKOR排序法決定各個方案之排序，希望能在不遺失客戶訂單及信任的期許下，決定最適合的委外對象。
From the perspective of trucking carriers, concerning transport horizontal integration and collaboration, when the vehicles are insufficient to meet the demand of transport, carrier could seek for other carrier’s help. In this study, we consider vehicle types, capacity, time windows, and the objective of minimum cost, to do vehicle route planning, and also decide which tasks should be outsoursed.
There are two phases in this study. First, after checking the insufficiency of own trucks, we use Tabu search to solve Vehicle Routing Problem with a Private fleet and a Common carrier (VRPPC) in order to find out the route of own vehicles and the tasks to be outsourced. In second phase, we will select the carrier to do those tasks. We not only consider the price of outsourcing, but also evaluate the capacity, service quality, risk management, and the goodwill of the company. We use Analytic Network Process (ANP) to decide the weight of each criterion, and VIKOR to rank each case and select the best one.
參考文獻 1. Alfredo Tang Montane, F., & Galvao, R. D. (2006). A tabu search algorithm for the vehicle routing problem with simultaneous pick-up and delivery service. Computers & Operations Research, 33(3), 595-619.
2. Ball, M. O., Golden, B. L., Assad, A. A., & Bodin, L. D. (1983). Planning for truck fleet size in the presence of a common-carrier option. Decision Sciences, 14(1), 103-120.
3. Barbarosoglu, G., & Ozgur, D. (1999). A tabu search algorithm for the vehicle routing problem. Computers and Operations Research, 26(3), 255–270.
4. Bianchessi, N., & Righini, G. (2007). Heuristic algorithms for the vehicle routing problem with simultaneous pick-up and delivery. Computers & Operations Research, 34(2), 578-594.
5. Bodin, L., Golden, B., Assad, A., & Ball, M. (1983). Routing and scheduling of vehicles and crews. Computers and Operations Research, 10(2), 63–211.
6. Bolduc, M. C., Renaud, J., & Boctor, F. (2007). A heuristic for the routing and carrier selection problem. European Journal of Operational Research, 183(2), 926–932.
7. Bolduc, M. C., Renaud, J., Boctor, F., & Laporte, G. (2008). A perturbation metaheuristic for the vehicle routing problem with private fleet and common carriers. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 59(6), 776–787.
8. Brandao, J. (2009). A deterministic tabu search algorithm for the fleet size and mix vehicle routing problem. European Journal of Operational Research, 195(3), 716-728.
9. Chu, M., Shyu, J., Tzeng, G., & Khosla, R. (2007). Comparison among three analytical methods for knowledge communities group-decision analysis. Expert Systems with Applications, 33(4), 1011-1024.
10. Cote, J. F., & Potvin, J. Y. (2009). A tabu search heuristic for the vehicle routing problem with private fleet and common carrier. European Journal of Operational Research, 198(2), 464–469.
11. Coulter William, R., & Ronald, L. (1989). Freight transportation carrier selection criteria:: Identification of service dimensions for competitive positioning. Journal of Business Research, 19(1), 51–66.
12. Desrochers, M., Desrosiers, J., & Solomon, M. (1992). A New Optimization Algorithm for the Vehicle Routing Problem with Time Windows. Operations Research, 40(2), 342-354.
13. D`este, G. M. (1992). Carrier selection in a RO/RO - ferry trade Part 2. Conceptual framework for the decision process -- Carrier selection in a RO/RO - ferry trade—Part 2. Maritime Policy & Management: The flagship journal of international shipping and port research, 19(2), 127.
14. Euchi, J., & Chabchoub, H. (2009). A hybrid genetic algorithm for the vehicle routing problem with private fleet and common carriers. ROADEF 2009, 243.
15. Euchi, J., & Chabchoub, H. (2010). Heuristic Search Techniques to Solve the Vehicle Routing with Private Fleet and Common Carrier. International Journal of Universal Computer Sciences, 1, 10-18.
16. Fisher, M. (1995). Vehicle routing. Network routing, 8, 1–33.
17. Gendreau, M., Hertz, A., & Laporte, G. (1994). A tabu search heuristic for the vehicle routing problem. Management Science, 40(10), 1276–1290.
18. Gheysens, F., Golden, B., & Assad, A. (1984). A comparison of techniques for solving the fleet size and mix vehicle routing problem. OR Spectrum, 6(4), 207-216.
19. Glover, F., Laguna, M., & Marti, R. (2000). Fundamentals of scatter search and path relinking. Control and Cybernetics, 39(3), 653–684.
20. Glover, F., & Marti, R. (2006). Tabu Search. Metaheuristic Procedures for Training Neutral Networks, 53-69.
21. Huizingh, E. K., & Vrolijk, H. C. (1995). Decision support for information systems management: applying analytic hierarchy process. Research Report.
22. Hwang, C. L., & Masud, A. S. (1979). Multiple objective decision making, methods and applications: a state-of-the-art survey. Springer.
23. Jharkharia, S., & Shankar, R. (2007). Selection of logistics service provider: An analytic network process (ANP) approach. Omega, 35(3), 274-289.
24. Klincewicz, J. G., Luss, H., & Pilcher, M. G. (1990). Fleet Size Planning when Outside Carrier Services Are Available. Transportation Science, 24(3), 169-182.
25. Laporte, G. (1992). The vehicle routing problem: An overview of exact and approximate algorithms. European Journal of Operational Research, 59(3), 345-358.
26. Meade, L., & Rogers, K. (1997). Enhancing a manufacturing business process for agility. Innovation in Technology Management. The Key to Global Leadership. PICMET `97 , 638-641.
27. Olson, D. L., & Wu, D. D. (2008). Enterprise risk management. World Scientific.
28. Opricovic, S., & Tzeng, G. (2004). Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS. European Journal of Operational Research, 156(2), 445-455.
29. Potvin, J. Y., & Naud, M. A. (2009). Tabu Search with Ejection Chains for the Vehicle Routing Problem with Private Fleet and Common Carrier. Journal of the Operational Research Society.
30. Proussaloglou, K., & Koppelman, F. S. (1999). The choice of air carrier, flight, and fare class. Journal of Air Transport Management, 5(4), 193-201.
31. Renaud, J., & Boctor, F. F. (2002). A sweep-based algorithm for the fleet size and mix vehicle routing problem. European Journal of Operational Research, 140(3), 618-628.
32. Saaty, T. L. (1996). The analytic network process. RWS Publication.
33. Saaty, T. L. (2005). Theory and Applications of the Analytic Network Process: Decision Making with Benefits, Opportunities, Costs, and Risks. RWS Publications.
34. Stewart, T. J. (1996). Relationships between Data Envelopment Analysis and Multicriteria Decision Analysis. The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 47(5), 654-665.
35. Thangiah, S. R. (1995). Vehicle routing with time windows using genetic algorithms. Application handbook of genetic algorithms: New frontiers, 2, 253–277.
36. Toth, P., & Vigo, D. (1997). An Exact Algorithm for the Vehicle Routing Problem with Backhauls. TRANSPORTATION SCIENCE, 31(4), 372-385.
37. Willard, J. A. G. (1989). Vehicle routing using r-optimal tabu search. Master`s thesis, The ManagementSchool, ImperialCollege, London.
38. Xue Dashen. (2009). The Study of Partners` Selection for Virtual Logistics Enterprises. Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, 2009. WKDD 2009. Second International Workshop on. 428-431.
39. 王保元(2000)，物流中心冷凍食品配送模式之研究，朝陽科技大學工業工程與管理研究所。
40. 王斌、唐國春(2009)，物流聯盟伙伴選擇模糊優化研究，河北科技大學學報，30(001)，69–74。
41. 交通部(2007)，交通年鑑。
42. 朱經武、洪秀幸(2004)，選擇以自有車輛運送或委託貨運公司服務之啟發式演算法，兩岸航運與物流的新觀念。
43. 李佳芳(2008)，綠色供應鏈中供應商評選之研究，國立政治大學資訊管理研究所。
44. 李俊佳(2002)，網路學習系統評估模式之研究-模糊多屬性決策之應用，中原大學資訊管理研究所。
45. 林志益(2005)，平板鋼鐵業企業資源規劃系統評選關鍵模組之研究，國立中山大學企業管理學系研究所。
46. 林俊宏、曾國雄、任維廉(2005)，利用 VIKOR 方法解決企業資源規劃系統評選問題，農業與經濟。
47. 邱華凱(2005)，應用模糊多準則決策分析與模糊集群方法探討綠色工程產業發展策略之研究，國立交通大學科技管理研究所。
48. 紀岱玲、林我聰(2006)，供應商績效評估研究－結合ANP 及 DEMATEL 之應用，2006年產學合作產業電子化研討會論文集。
49. 徐旺和、柯秉輝、魏慶地、邱榮和&鍾明宏(2009)，國內物流業者評選委外運送商之關鍵因素分析，中華民國運輸學會。
50. 梁金樹、丁吉峰、許哲維(2009)，第三方物流業者評選模式之建構：模糊多準則決策之應用，航運季刊，第十八卷(第三期)，頁17~36。
51. 莊英群(2002)，應用禁忌搜尋法於混合送收貨之車輛途程問題，逢甲大學工業工程研究所。
52. 許哲維(2008)，第三方物流業者評選模式之建構與應用，國立海洋大學航運管理學系。
53. 許國維(2006)，營造公司經營高科技廠房競爭優勢評估。國立臺灣科技大學營建工程系。
54. 陳建宇(2005)，以基因演算法結合層級分析法求解多廠區訂單分配，國立政治大學資訊管理研究所。
55. 陳虹遐(2004)，應用分析網路程序法於液晶電視之生態效益評估，國立成功大學工業設計研究所。
56. 陳惠國(2009)，網路與物流分析 (第一版)，五南圖書出版股份有限公司。
57. 楊絜茹(2009)，即時資訊與啟發式演算法應用於臨時撿收需求之研究，逢甲大學運輸科技與管理學系。
58. 劉建宏(2005)，含時窗限制式卡車與拖車途程問題之研究，國立中央大學土木工程研究所。
59. 鄧振源、曾國雄(1989)，層級分析法(AHP)的內涵特性與應用 (上)，中國統計學報，27(6)，頁1–20。
60. 韓復華、卓裕仁(1996)，門檻接受法、成本擾動法與搜尋空間平滑法在車輛路線問題之應用研究與比較分析，運輸學刊，第9卷(第3期)，頁103-129。
61. 簡世釗(2000)，時窗與容量限制下車輛途程問題之研究，國立成功大學工業管理學系。
62. 蘇雄義(2000)，物流與運籌管理，華泰文化事業公司。
63. 張瑞鵬、何世偉&宋瑞(2007)，基于網絡層次分析法和熵權的運輸商選擇方法，北京交通大學學報：社會科學版，第6卷(第004期)，頁38–42。
描述 碩士
國立政治大學
資訊管理研究所
97356038
99
資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0097356038
資料類型 thesis
dc.contributor.advisor 林我聰zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (作者) 謝宛汝zh_TW
dc.creator (作者) 謝宛汝zh_TW
dc.date (日期) 2010en_US
dc.date.accessioned 4-九月-2013 16:57:44 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 4-九月-2013 16:57:44 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 4-九月-2013 16:57:44 (UTC+8)-
dc.identifier (其他 識別碼) G0097356038en_US
dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/60209-
dc.description (描述) 碩士zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 資訊管理研究所zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 97356038zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 99zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) 本研究以單一汽車貨運業者的角度，評估當運輸需求大於自有車輛服務能力時，考量車種、時窗、貨物量等因素，以最小化成本為目標進行途程規劃，利用運輸水平整合、協同合作的概念，將未能滿足之需求任務委外給其他同業進行。
本研究主要分為兩階段，第一階段先確認是否需要委外，以禁忌搜尋法找出最節省成本之配送途程以及委外任務，解決業者選擇以自有車輛運送或委外給其他運輸業者服務的問題；而第二階段則是在確定委外的任務後，決定委外的對象，不僅考量對方出價，也評估對方的營運能力、商譽、風險管理、服務品質等因素，建構一多準則決策模式，透過網路程序分析法(ANP)決定評選準則權重，再利用VIKOR排序法決定各個方案之排序，希望能在不遺失客戶訂單及信任的期許下，決定最適合的委外對象。		zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) From the perspective of trucking carriers, concerning transport horizontal integration and collaboration, when the vehicles are insufficient to meet the demand of transport, carrier could seek for other carrier’s help. In this study, we consider vehicle types, capacity, time windows, and the objective of minimum cost, to do vehicle route planning, and also decide which tasks should be outsoursed.
There are two phases in this study. First, after checking the insufficiency of own trucks, we use Tabu search to solve Vehicle Routing Problem with a Private fleet and a Common carrier (VRPPC) in order to find out the route of own vehicles and the tasks to be outsourced. In second phase, we will select the carrier to do those tasks. We not only consider the price of outsourcing, but also evaluate the capacity, service quality, risk management, and the goodwill of the company. We use Analytic Network Process (ANP) to decide the weight of each criterion, and VIKOR to rank each case and select the best one.		en_US
dc.description.tableofcontents 第一章、緒論 1
1.1 研究背景 1
1.2 研究動機 2
1.3 研究目的 3
1.4 研究流程 3
1.5 研究限制 4
第二章、文獻探討 5
2.1 車輛途程問題(Vehicle routing problem, VRP) 5
2.1.1 VRP描述與定義 5
2.1.2 VRP數學規劃模式 6
2.1.3 VRP型態 7
2.2 VRP之變化 8
2.2.1 考量時窗之車輛途程問題 8
2.2.2 考量同時收送貨之車輛途程問題 10
2.2.3多車種車輛途程問題 10
2.2.4 考量自己配送或委外之車輛途程問題 11
2.3啟發式方法 13
2.3.1 車輛途程問題之求解策略 13
2.3.2 啟發式方法比較 15
2.3.3 禁忌搜尋法(Tabu Search) 16
2.4 評選因子探討 19
2.4.1 虛擬企業評選 19
2.4.2 物流、運輸委外業者評選 20
2.5多準則決策(Multiple Criteria Decision Making, MCDM) 21
2.5.1 層級程序分析法(Analytic Hierarchy Process, AHP) 23
2.5.2 網路程序分析法(Analytic Network Process, ANP) 25
2.5.3 VIKOR排序法 28
第三章、研究方法 30
3.1 研究架構 30
3.2 任務分配與規劃之研究問題 31
3.2.1 問題特性 32
3.2.2 模型限制 33
3.2.3 決策目標的選擇 33
3.2.4 模型輸入與輸出 34
3.2.5 數學模式建立 34
3.2.6 禁忌搜尋法 37
3.3 建立準則權重 38
3.3.1 確立評選準則與方法 38
3.3.2 建立ANP之網路結構 41
3.3.3 ANP問卷設計 41
3.3.4 整合專家意見 42
3.3.5 建立成對比較矩陣 42
3.3.6 計算特徵值與特徵向量 43
3.3.7 問卷之一致性檢定 43
3.3.8 超級矩陣運算 44
3.4 進行委外業者的排序 45
第四章、車輛途程規劃及準則權重調查 48
4.1 車輛途程規劃步驟 48
4.3.1 確認是否需要委外 48
4.3.2 起始途程建構 49
4.3.3 最佳化程序 49
4.2以網路程序分析法計算準則權重 53
4.2.1 評選準則建立與網路結構 53
4.2.2 問卷發放與回收情形 53
4.2.3 整合專家意見及一致性檢定 54
4.2.4 權重結果計算 54
4.2.5 信度與效度分析 56
第五章、實驗測試範例 57
5.1 禁忌搜尋法之實驗 57
5.1.1 測試例題資訊 57
5.1.2 程式參數設定與實驗結果 57
5.2 評選範例 59
第六章、結論與未來建議 62
參考文獻 63
附錄一、ANP權重調查問卷 68
附錄二、各準則與構面之一致性檢定結果 81		zh_TW
dc.format.extent 1184616 bytes-
dc.format.extent 1184616 bytes-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.language.iso en_US-
dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0097356038en_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 禁忌搜尋法zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 網路程序分析法zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) VIKOR排序法zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 自有車輛配送或委外zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Tabu Searchen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) ANPen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) VIKORen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) VRPPCen_US
dc.title (題名) 汽車貨運業者車輛資源不足之車輛途程規劃及業務委外評選模式zh_TW
dc.title (題名) Vehicle routing problem and the selection of outsourcing forwarder when transport vehicles are insufficienten_US
dc.type (資料類型) thesisen
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 1. Alfredo Tang Montane, F., & Galvao, R. D. (2006). A tabu search algorithm for the vehicle routing problem with simultaneous pick-up and delivery service. Computers & Operations Research, 33(3), 595-619.
2. Ball, M. O., Golden, B. L., Assad, A. A., & Bodin, L. D. (1983). Planning for truck fleet size in the presence of a common-carrier option. Decision Sciences, 14(1), 103-120.
3. Barbarosoglu, G., & Ozgur, D. (1999). A tabu search algorithm for the vehicle routing problem. Computers and Operations Research, 26(3), 255–270.
4. Bianchessi, N., & Righini, G. (2007). Heuristic algorithms for the vehicle routing problem with simultaneous pick-up and delivery. Computers & Operations Research, 34(2), 578-594.
5. Bodin, L., Golden, B., Assad, A., & Ball, M. (1983). Routing and scheduling of vehicles and crews. Computers and Operations Research, 10(2), 63–211.
6. Bolduc, M. C., Renaud, J., & Boctor, F. (2007). A heuristic for the routing and carrier selection problem. European Journal of Operational Research, 183(2), 926–932.
7. Bolduc, M. C., Renaud, J., Boctor, F., & Laporte, G. (2008). A perturbation metaheuristic for the vehicle routing problem with private fleet and common carriers. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 59(6), 776–787.
8. Brandao, J. (2009). A deterministic tabu search algorithm for the fleet size and mix vehicle routing problem. European Journal of Operational Research, 195(3), 716-728.
9. Chu, M., Shyu, J., Tzeng, G., & Khosla, R. (2007). Comparison among three analytical methods for knowledge communities group-decision analysis. Expert Systems with Applications, 33(4), 1011-1024.
10. Cote, J. F., & Potvin, J. Y. (2009). A tabu search heuristic for the vehicle routing problem with private fleet and common carrier. European Journal of Operational Research, 198(2), 464–469.
11. Coulter William, R., & Ronald, L. (1989). Freight transportation carrier selection criteria:: Identification of service dimensions for competitive positioning. Journal of Business Research, 19(1), 51–66.
12. Desrochers, M., Desrosiers, J., & Solomon, M. (1992). A New Optimization Algorithm for the Vehicle Routing Problem with Time Windows. Operations Research, 40(2), 342-354.
13. D`este, G. M. (1992). Carrier selection in a RO/RO - ferry trade Part 2. Conceptual framework for the decision process -- Carrier selection in a RO/RO - ferry trade—Part 2. Maritime Policy & Management: The flagship journal of international shipping and port research, 19(2), 127.
14. Euchi, J., & Chabchoub, H. (2009). A hybrid genetic algorithm for the vehicle routing problem with private fleet and common carriers. ROADEF 2009, 243.
15. Euchi, J., & Chabchoub, H. (2010). Heuristic Search Techniques to Solve the Vehicle Routing with Private Fleet and Common Carrier. International Journal of Universal Computer Sciences, 1, 10-18.
16. Fisher, M. (1995). Vehicle routing. Network routing, 8, 1–33.
17. Gendreau, M., Hertz, A., & Laporte, G. (1994). A tabu search heuristic for the vehicle routing problem. Management Science, 40(10), 1276–1290.
18. Gheysens, F., Golden, B., & Assad, A. (1984). A comparison of techniques for solving the fleet size and mix vehicle routing problem. OR Spectrum, 6(4), 207-216.
19. Glover, F., Laguna, M., & Marti, R. (2000). Fundamentals of scatter search and path relinking. Control and Cybernetics, 39(3), 653–684.
20. Glover, F., & Marti, R. (2006). Tabu Search. Metaheuristic Procedures for Training Neutral Networks, 53-69.
21. Huizingh, E. K., & Vrolijk, H. C. (1995). Decision support for information systems management: applying analytic hierarchy process. Research Report.
22. Hwang, C. L., & Masud, A. S. (1979). Multiple objective decision making, methods and applications: a state-of-the-art survey. Springer.
23. Jharkharia, S., & Shankar, R. (2007). Selection of logistics service provider: An analytic network process (ANP) approach. Omega, 35(3), 274-289.
24. Klincewicz, J. G., Luss, H., & Pilcher, M. G. (1990). Fleet Size Planning when Outside Carrier Services Are Available. Transportation Science, 24(3), 169-182.
25. Laporte, G. (1992). The vehicle routing problem: An overview of exact and approximate algorithms. European Journal of Operational Research, 59(3), 345-358.
26. Meade, L., & Rogers, K. (1997). Enhancing a manufacturing business process for agility. Innovation in Technology Management. The Key to Global Leadership. PICMET `97 , 638-641.
27. Olson, D. L., & Wu, D. D. (2008). Enterprise risk management. World Scientific.
28. Opricovic, S., & Tzeng, G. (2004). Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS. European Journal of Operational Research, 156(2), 445-455.
29. Potvin, J. Y., & Naud, M. A. (2009). Tabu Search with Ejection Chains for the Vehicle Routing Problem with Private Fleet and Common Carrier. Journal of the Operational Research Society.
30. Proussaloglou, K., & Koppelman, F. S. (1999). The choice of air carrier, flight, and fare class. Journal of Air Transport Management, 5(4), 193-201.
31. Renaud, J., & Boctor, F. F. (2002). A sweep-based algorithm for the fleet size and mix vehicle routing problem. European Journal of Operational Research, 140(3), 618-628.
32. Saaty, T. L. (1996). The analytic network process. RWS Publication.
33. Saaty, T. L. (2005). Theory and Applications of the Analytic Network Process: Decision Making with Benefits, Opportunities, Costs, and Risks. RWS Publications.
34. Stewart, T. J. (1996). Relationships between Data Envelopment Analysis and Multicriteria Decision Analysis. The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 47(5), 654-665.
35. Thangiah, S. R. (1995). Vehicle routing with time windows using genetic algorithms. Application handbook of genetic algorithms: New frontiers, 2, 253–277.
36. Toth, P., & Vigo, D. (1997). An Exact Algorithm for the Vehicle Routing Problem with Backhauls. TRANSPORTATION SCIENCE, 31(4), 372-385.
37. Willard, J. A. G. (1989). Vehicle routing using r-optimal tabu search. Master`s thesis, The ManagementSchool, ImperialCollege, London.
38. Xue Dashen. (2009). The Study of Partners` Selection for Virtual Logistics Enterprises. Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, 2009. WKDD 2009. Second International Workshop on. 428-431.
39. 王保元(2000)，物流中心冷凍食品配送模式之研究，朝陽科技大學工業工程與管理研究所。
40. 王斌、唐國春(2009)，物流聯盟伙伴選擇模糊優化研究，河北科技大學學報，30(001)，69–74。
41. 交通部(2007)，交通年鑑。
42. 朱經武、洪秀幸(2004)，選擇以自有車輛運送或委託貨運公司服務之啟發式演算法，兩岸航運與物流的新觀念。
43. 李佳芳(2008)，綠色供應鏈中供應商評選之研究，國立政治大學資訊管理研究所。
44. 李俊佳(2002)，網路學習系統評估模式之研究-模糊多屬性決策之應用，中原大學資訊管理研究所。
45. 林志益(2005)，平板鋼鐵業企業資源規劃系統評選關鍵模組之研究，國立中山大學企業管理學系研究所。
46. 林俊宏、曾國雄、任維廉(2005)，利用 VIKOR 方法解決企業資源規劃系統評選問題，農業與經濟。
47. 邱華凱(2005)，應用模糊多準則決策分析與模糊集群方法探討綠色工程產業發展策略之研究，國立交通大學科技管理研究所。
48. 紀岱玲、林我聰(2006)，供應商績效評估研究－結合ANP 及 DEMATEL 之應用，2006年產學合作產業電子化研討會論文集。
49. 徐旺和、柯秉輝、魏慶地、邱榮和&鍾明宏(2009)，國內物流業者評選委外運送商之關鍵因素分析，中華民國運輸學會。
50. 梁金樹、丁吉峰、許哲維(2009)，第三方物流業者評選模式之建構：模糊多準則決策之應用，航運季刊，第十八卷(第三期)，頁17~36。
51. 莊英群(2002)，應用禁忌搜尋法於混合送收貨之車輛途程問題，逢甲大學工業工程研究所。
52. 許哲維(2008)，第三方物流業者評選模式之建構與應用，國立海洋大學航運管理學系。
53. 許國維(2006)，營造公司經營高科技廠房競爭優勢評估。國立臺灣科技大學營建工程系。
54. 陳建宇(2005)，以基因演算法結合層級分析法求解多廠區訂單分配，國立政治大學資訊管理研究所。
55. 陳虹遐(2004)，應用分析網路程序法於液晶電視之生態效益評估，國立成功大學工業設計研究所。
56. 陳惠國(2009)，網路與物流分析 (第一版)，五南圖書出版股份有限公司。
57. 楊絜茹(2009)，即時資訊與啟發式演算法應用於臨時撿收需求之研究，逢甲大學運輸科技與管理學系。
58. 劉建宏(2005)，含時窗限制式卡車與拖車途程問題之研究，國立中央大學土木工程研究所。
59. 鄧振源、曾國雄(1989)，層級分析法(AHP)的內涵特性與應用 (上)，中國統計學報，27(6)，頁1–20。
60. 韓復華、卓裕仁(1996)，門檻接受法、成本擾動法與搜尋空間平滑法在車輛路線問題之應用研究與比較分析，運輸學刊，第9卷(第3期)，頁103-129。
61. 簡世釗(2000)，時窗與容量限制下車輛途程問題之研究，國立成功大學工業管理學系。
62. 蘇雄義(2000)，物流與運籌管理，華泰文化事業公司。
63. 張瑞鵬、何世偉&宋瑞(2007)，基于網絡層次分析法和熵權的運輸商選擇方法，北京交通大學學報：社會科學版，第6卷(第004期)，頁38–42。		zh_TW