|
|
|
|
|
by ge0ffrey
17 days ago
|
|
There is an audience for such platforms - Timefold Platform optimizes 1,000,000 visits and 2,000,000 shifts per week - but only if it's more than just orchestration. If it handles explainabily, what-if scenarios and insights to fulfill business needs. And that's where supporting many solvers becomes the blocker. A lowest common denominator design. Those solvers are a black box. They don't expose what they're running, why they made certain decisions or how they can scale to large datasets or complex business requirements. We've picked our poison: one solver, which we've built in the open, in the last 20 years, versatile enough to handle any scheduling problem. That delivers. |
|
Many of them, including Timefold, lack a realistic, financially grounded model of the world. They do not adequately account for traffic, driver preferences, or other factors that require a continuous feedback loop between what actually happened in practice and what the optimizer expected to happen.
A vehicle-routing problem without real-world feedback is little more than a gimmick. Even assuming the world could be modelled perfectly, what happens when an unpredictable event disrupts the plan? Is the supposedly “globally optimal” solution robust enough to adapt, or will it create a backlog that forces the business to hire additional workers because the system failed to build in sufficient redundancy?
Using MILP makes the system even less flexible.