lor &.

Francis
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF MATHEMATICAL AND MANAGEMENT SCIENCES
Q Tay'
~ Taylor "'
Francis Group

2023 VOL 42, NO. l , 69 - 85

https,://doiorg/1o.1080/ 01966324.2022.2027302
'fl) c;r,eck tor updates

More-for-Less Paradox in Time Minimization Transportation

Problem with Mixed Constraints

swati Agarwal'1 • 6 ® and Shambhu Sharma 6

•'Institute of Applied Sciences, Mangalayatan University, /\ligiHh , India; hDepartment of Mathemati cs,
Faculty of Science, Dayalbagh Educational Institute, Agril , Ind ia

ABSTRACT KEYWORDS
In emergency situations, such as at the time of the outbreak of infec- AND PHRASES
tious viruses (COVID-19, SARS, Ebola, MERS, etc.), strike of natural dis- Tim e minim ization
asters (Earthquakes, tsunamis, cyclones, etc.), wars, terrorist attacks, transportation probl em:
more-for-le ss; param etric
etc., where distributing essential goods and services in minimum
approach; parado x;
possible time is a major logistical challenge, the concept of more-
optimal solut ion
for-less paradox could be helpful. In a minimization type transporta-
tion problem, this paradoxical situation occurs when the value of
objective function falls below the optimum value by shipping a large
number of total goods. In this article, a unified algorithm is devel-
oped to identify and resolve the existence of paradoxical situation in
the time minimization transportation problem with mixed constraints
using right-hand side parametric formulation. Using this prior
approach, the paradoxical solution (if exists) can be found first, fol-
lowed by an optimal solution. If the paradoxical part does not exist,
it gets neglected. The conditions governing the existence of more
transportation flow in less shipping time enable the decision-maker
to extend the optimal solution in search of more-for-less opportunity
at the time of emergency. The validity of an algorithm has been
tested through numerical illustrations and by computational observa-
tions on matlab.

1. Introduction

The classical transportation problems (TP) or cost minimization transportation prob-

lems (CMTP) are a certain class of linear programming problems (LPP) in terms of its
prevalent applications. CMTPs deal with the transportation of homogeneous commodity
from a number of sources to a number of destinations with the objective of minimizing
the total cost of transportation. It was originated from the study of Hitchcock (1941).
thus also known as Hitchcock-Koops man transportation problem. The concept of mixed
constraints in CMTP was first studied by Appa (1973) and then by Brigden (1974) and
Klingman and Russel (1974).
In the distribution problems, when essential goods and services are to be delivered in
the minimum possible time, the objective of minimizing the shipment time is preferred.
For example, in emergency situations such as the outbreak of infectious viruses, natural

CONTACT Swati Agarwal S swatiagarwal.dei @gmail.com ~ Institute of Applied Sciences, Mangalayatan U111versity,
Aligarh, India.
© 2022 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
 ?O 9 S. AGARWAL AND S. SHARMA

d. t
i~as
shipm
e:~~
f e minimizatio
.
terrorism, war, d e1·1very o f peris hable

. .
•
items while retai ning the quali ty, etc. savin
time is critical. This gives rise lo a very notew
orthy va_ria
. bl , (TM TP) TMT P dctcrm111es X;j, the
nt 11 d h
of TP, ca e t e
g

n trans porta l 1011 p1 o t m · num ber of

im d·t· . . , .
commo 1 1es trans· porte ·
d from ;'Ii sour ce to i''' dcsli nalio n sal1sfy
111g given supp ly and
demand limits so that the trans porta tion is to · , . . . . . ,
he J1111sh ed 111 1111111mu111 time.
TMTP was oril!,in.,lly studi ed by P.1.. Il.11nnwr
(1969, 1971) . Szwa rc (1971a, 1971b) prc-
cis-;;d the H,,mmc,r's algor ithm and ga\'c the
extensive surve y on TMT P. c;arl1nkel an_<l Rao
(\971 ), Bhatia t'l al. ( l 977 ), t'lc. provided
the vario us algorill~n~!-. wh ic h arc well 1m~l
mentt'd in re.11 lite distr ibuti on prob kms .. In ~-
recen t years, rcal1zlllg the poten tial appltc<t
tions 0( Tl\lT P. Y.irious resea rcher s viz. Gupt -
a and Aror a (2019), Mch lawa l cl al. (201 9),
Singh anJ Singh (2018), Roy et al. (201 7)
have made impo rtant studi es on its varia
nts
) usii~g time as one of the objective funct ions
~nd ~Sharma (2014. 2018 , 2020) incor pora ted
an,ro aches to obtai n optim ality , both directly
. To make TMT P pract ically relev ant, Agar
mLxed cons train ts and deve loped mult iple
wal

and throu gh the basic solut ion .

The rnrre nt artic le addr esses an analy sis of
more- for-less (MFL ) para doxi cal situa tion
in T;\fT P with mixe d cons train ts (TM TP-M
C) . This trans porta tion para dox was first
intro duce d by Char nes and Klin gman (19
71). The MFL para dox in TMT P-M C arise
" ·hen the trans porta tion time can furth er s
be redu ced by raisi ng the num ber of com
modi ties to be ship ped such that at least -
the same amo unt of com mod ity is ship ped
from each supp ly poin t to each dem and poin
t, keep ing all the trans porti ng com mod ities
non- nega tive (i.e., xij 2:: 0) .
The analysis of MFL para dox in TMT P-M
C is moti vated by emer genc y situa tions
such as at the time of natu ral disas ters, war,
etc., wher e a little delay may caus e a mas-
siYe loss of lives. This analy sis is quite helpf
ul for mana gers also in mak ing deci sion
like when to incre ase the capa city of ware s
hous e or when to adve rtise a com mod ity
incre ase its dem and in certa in mark et, etc., to
whil e distr ibuti ng the peris habl e good s.
this article, a unifi ed itera tive algo rithm is In
deve loped . For this, equa lity cons train ts
the nom inal prob lem are pertu rbed or devia of
ted by addi ng some unkn own para mete rs
form para metr ic TMT P-M C and solve d by to
pivo ting appr oach deve lope d for the optim
solut ion of TMT P-M C. The idea behi nd al
pertu rbing the equa lity cons train ts is
impr ove the solut ion by dive rting the alloc to
ation s towa rd the diag onal cells. And , this
impo rtant beca use MFL para doxi cal situa is
tion does not exist in a perfe ct TP, in whic
only diago nal cells are alloc ated . The prop h
osed algo rithm is desig ned in such a way
after analy zing the exist ence of MFL para that
doxi cal situa tion, it also prov ides an opti
solut ion of TMT P-M C. mal
The curre nt articl e is orga nized as follows.
Next secti on prese nts the math emat ical for-
mula tion of TMT P-M C. In Secti on 3, a techn
ique for analy zing the MFL in TMT P-M C
developed. The solut ion strat egy is theor etica is
lly justif ied in secti on 4 and the algo rithm
prese nted in secti on 5. The num erica l exam is
ple and com puta tiona l resul ts are discu ssed
secti ons 6 and 7, respectively. Finally, conc in
lusio ns are prov ided in the last secti on.

2. Mathematical Formulation

If I= { l, 2, ... , m} and / = {1, 2, ... , n} are the inde x sets of m sour ces and n des-
tinat ions, respe ctive ly with each set parti
tione d into three disjo int non- emp ty
sets
 AMfRICAN IOlJHNAI. Of MAlltrMAll(Al AND MANAG EMlNT SCI ENCES 9 71

(:t i , cx 2 , cx 3 ) and (// 1 . /<., . /1 1 ). ,r ~pr,ti,·l' I)' · ,111h th ,11 h 1, /1 1 ) tomi ~t ~ of index of
so urces and dc.,11n.1tin11 ~ h,\\'lllt{ "g11•.11 r 1 lh.111 111 l' q11 ,1I t1J " typr' ~11pply .111d d e m a nd
conslr.,int., : (.r;. / i- ) 1q •1 c " ·1,1, th l' nn c h .,,.111 g " ,· q11 .d11 >.. ' YI" , ,q,pl y .11111 rl c 111 .1nrl con -
rq11 ,1I Ill .• tyr•c I('' o/ 1
s tra1nl~ . ,11,d ( l 1 , //, ) , , f,,, "k ., , 111.111 '"
/ (·1 1 I J '/ 1 )

.111d /", J\ lf!, ,• f,' .)

f ,·t ,; ,111,I /-. \ I, n11d / ( / h,· th,· llflll l\ ('n ,111 v 1• .1 v.1d .il ,1l 111 1••· ,111cl rl ,•111 ,1nd ~ ,ii JI/
/

~,, \li l l' ' .111 , i ' l ,lo 1111.1t1;,11,. i l'' l'l' lll\cl )' l'o, l' ,11h ( 1, J) ' f .,. , . le t, ,, lw 1l1 c ,t 'i~ 'l ' l.-l f Crl
~hq •ni.· nt 11111c. 1hc11 1hc rn .,1lw111.,11, .,1 111 o d cl lllr I /11! 11' ,\ !( : ,~ t" f111cl til l' f, •,1~1h lc ,,,111
lh ' Jl \ ll' t he r,,111'\\ 111)! ,,, ll"'l' ll l.
,\ 11 1111111 ; ,· / 1ll ,l '< ( I I/.
,, ,
,\ ,, • !J ) / II

,-i 1 hcd t,, tlw ,·nn qr,unb

,,. ..... ,i,. \- I t- .l I ;

,,
) .\ ,, ,1 ,. \/ I ( 'l );
"
l:>·•1-· n,, ·1 , • , , l
,, ~ [, ,. \-- _i E /I ,:
I

"'
Lx, = b,.
I

I
1 Vj C fl2 ;
I

I
I

L'" X,1 '.S' bl,

I
cf j C /i, J
(2 )

\ , ~ (1 , \-- \ i, j) E / >- /
'

ll .:-an be noted th at ( I) is a conca\'e fun ction , so th e sea rch for an optimal soluti on
1s rc!'tncted to the set of basic feas ible so lution s only (Bansal & Puri, 1980) .

3. Identification of M FL Paradox in TMTP-MC

A perfect TP is the one in which minimum number of cells are allocated in its so lution.
Jf the number of sources is equal to the number of destin ations, then in a perfect TP
only diago nal cells should be allocated. Clearly, a perfect TP with m sources and n des -
tin atio ns wo uld have only max{ m, n} number of allocated cells. It is known that th e
MFL paradoxical situation does not exist in a perfect transportation problem
(A r sham , 1992).
Th us, TP can be made perfect, simply by building the warehouses in the area where
the facto ri es are built. In practical environment, however, it cannot be practiced every-
v,,here due to several constraints like lack of space, transportation , skilled workforce and
other local environmental factors. In such cases, by providing just enough more units
~o that minimum number of cells are allocated, the new TP becomes a near to perfect
TP (A rsham , 1992; Robb, 1990) .
Arsham and Oblak (1990) showed that the MFL phenomenon is based on relaxing
the equality type constraints for a given TP. In TMTP-MC, it occurs if the value of
objecti ve fun ction falls below the optimal lime of transportation by increasing some n;'s
and/or b/ s without reducing other a/ s and s. Due to equality constraint relaxation in b/
the nominal problem, the total number of commodities X = (x;j ) may increase and the
solution may not remain optimal lo the TMTP-MC but better than that. The right -
hand side (RHS) of equality constraints is therefore perturbed or deviated by adding
some unknown parameters, which could be errors or uncertainties in the d,\ta.
Introducing the parameters, say /J;u's and p 0/s in TMTP - MC, we obtain a parnmdric
TMTP-MC (P -TMTP -MC) with the same objec tive function given i11 ( l) as follows:
 72 9 5. AGARWAL AND S. SHARMA

L \,, ,,,
II II
II

z:=.\, ~ 1 11 , . \i i l .X 1; I 11,il. V , { ''0 , LX11/ 11,, 'ti i E '.Y.3

I I I I I I
m Ill Ill

' ·' " '

,.._.J /•,.
\· I l /i I : \ -..
,--J

I
\ I/ I,, I f 1il 1• V / ' // ' ; Lx,, , ,. 1,,, V j c.. fil
I I I r I

, , .. P ,11• 1 111 , ' 0. V ( I. I) ( I '< J

( 3)

nw l'\tSll'lh.l' l)t' ,Ill ~In , p.11.1dn:-. k .d ~illl,lllllll Ill I.P , C: MTP and CM 'f fl -M C require s
,.'nlY the t' \ iSlt' th"t' nf .11 le.1st lllll' nf the p,1ramclcr al the pu~itive level in th e o
ptim al
St)lultl'l1 ot' tht' p.1r.1ml'l rk prohkm . Thl' co n~lrainl s of TMTP -MC an d CMTP -MC
arc
c,.,.-tly tlw s.rnw. hcn cc the ~\FL situation in P-TMTP -MC wi ll occur on ly if
at least
one t1f thl' unkn own para ml'll'rs exists in the optimal solution as a po~ilive va lu e.

I 4. So lution St rategy

Thl:' proposed algorithm starts with the solution of an equivalent but standard LP type
model of P-TI\1TP-MC to generate an initial bas ic infeas ible but optimal solution. Then
,
the repositioning of basic and non-bas ic variable is perform ed to skew the infeasibl
e
solutio n toward an optimal solution . Transfo rmati on of coefficient matrix is processe
d
fo r the relocation of variables through eta factorization method .
Since an identity matrix is nonsingular, it is perfect for an initial basic solution of
any LPP. Thus, mi..-xed constraints of (3) are annexed with some dummy (or slack) vari-
ables. This transforms the current model of P-TMTP-MC into a standard LP type
model as expresse d below, where the objective function is same as in ( 1)
n
n
S,o - 2::>iJ
J= I
=- a ;, 'r:/ i E et 1; P;o - I::>ij= -a;,
j=l
V i E et 2 ; s;o
II

+ Lx,j = a;, \/ i E :X3

m j=I
so1 - L x;j = -bj,
1= 1
Vj E /3 1 ; Poj - Lxij
m

= -bj, soj
"'
+ Lx;1 = b., ,
i= I i= I
x,; , P,o , Po1 2: 0, V (i,j) E J x J

(4)
Here, ~,o, Poj and s;o, soj are unknown parameters and slack variables respectively. In
the matnx form, standard P-TMTP -MC from (1) and (4) can be written as follows :
Minimize T(X) = max
,,;
{ . . t I) ·' t I) E Y.l xij > 0> x ij E X} (5)
subject to the constraints

(I, A)X = b; x ~o (6)

~here, ~ (m+n ) x mn . is a c~effk_ient matrix of variables (excluding slack variables) of given
con st ramts, Im _111 is the 1dent1ty matrix correspo nding to the paramet ers and slack varia-
~lbesl, b (m+dn )x 1 is a column ma trix of RHS values, X (11111 + 111+. 11 )x 1 is a column matrix of
1a es• an paramelers and T var -
·• ·
1 x( 1111, 11111 n ) 1s a row matrix o [ transpor tation time.
. Without loss of generality , cons t r,Hnt .·
matnx. A .
1s assumed to have a full row rank,
1.e., ra~k(A) = m + n and the problem is assumed to be feasible, if the prob lem fai
be feasible, there wi ll be no s0 I t· ls to
If . . ,
u ion. matrix A 1s rank-deficient, then it has redunda nt
 AM ER ICAN JUVt11~/-\L vr rvrn ,, ,~,. ,, ' ' •-· ·- · ..

Table 1. Initial simplex-type table . x11

x11
,11 0
711
N b
z fl
XS

II istnints This ,1 ssurnpt1011

coi · ' · · 1 . I 1-
IC :O-ll 11 1011,
· I(' ,H t ~ the .,hl
th. ,hiiiincnl
,
k v·111
lilll l'
'
;1
,
,tile .~ i11. tl1 c optim al. ha'>i'> hut to prevent
,,0Lia 1cd witl1 th em I', •,c l lo zero .
1·ts in11i,1l't on t
l , . . . /J
• .. . . ·t ,,·s •\f\d ,l.ick variables arc t rcatcd a, ha<,1 c 111 (o), letN U',' 'i upp h
o'iC "'
f
S111 Cl' t 1\l' I'·" ,\Jl\l l ' ' . '
' . · . ·II·· \ S,lKi \led wilh th e~<' 111 I II l>a~ic vari able•; and '" J'i l c '>C l o
1, 1 t H' ~l'I () 1 1. l. ,, ' ' ' • . [ II NI' I: ' h
· . . )ll \) \si·1.·. cell s The vector X h pa1 tit io 11 cd a·, x x wh ere, x 1.c; l ef
ll'lll,lllllll~lll/1 11 ( . • · . . . . .
· t _:. - ,,.,r ·. t k s , 0\ ' is the sl'I of 11011 basi c variable~, and '111d 1cate •, th e tran '> p<1 <,e o _
set() I ),1~11.. • 1' 1 1 • • . ' , [· •/I . ·'-']
1 ' , · /j , cl T "'
.. ·,. .. Co nsc<.iucntl)·, vec tor ']' is partitioned into 1 I wh ere, I an
,1 m. ltl 1., . h b . d
n-srcl'tiwly ,m' the sets of tran sportation tim es corrcspon<lin~ to t c a~ 1~ an
non-b,1sic cells. Ckarly. B and N co ntain th e co lumn vectors of basic and non -basic va r-
I i.1h ks . rcsp cctiwly.
l1sin ~ the partitions of vectors and matri ces as di scusse d above, th e probl em co nsist-
~ . B N
ing (5) and (6) ca n be restructured as follows for x , x 2 0.

Minimize Z= max{ l;j : tu E TH, xu =-/= 0}

such that Bx 8 + NxN = b (7)
This restructured problem is given in Table 1 in a tabular form . It is observed from
Table 1 that the objective function has no direct involvement in the computation of
matrices B and N because shipment time, tu E T is independent of the amount of com -
modit)', xu( =I 0) EX. Clearly, Z is a function of tu and tu is not a function of x;1 but
considered only if X;j > 0. This reveals that Z does not contain X;j explicitly but contains
implicitly. Thus, T ( = T 8 U TN) remains unaltered throughout the process but entries
8
of T 8 and TN, both change independently. The t ;j changes its position from T to y N
and vice-versa, but its magnitude remains the same. This repositioning of t ij alters the
objective function value because the objective function, Z is max { t ij : tu E T 8 , x;j -=/ O} .
For an initial basic solution, all non -basic variables are fixed as zero i.e., xN = O,
which reduces (7) to x 8 = B- 1b. Since B- 1 = I and T 8 = 0, then x8 = b, xN = O and
Z = 0, which may be infeasible, but better than optimal, like in dual simplex method.
For the solution at any basis B, pre-multiplication by B- 1 on both sides of (7) gives the
generalized simplex-type table as shown in Table 2. The basic solution of the problem is
Z = max{ tu : t;j E T , xu I- 0} with x8 = B- b and xi'I = 0, which continues to be
8 1

infeasible until the true optimal solution is reached.

Now proceed by performing successive pivot operations to improve the bas ic solution
in Table 2. Pivoting updates, the basis by swapping a basic variable with a non-basic
variable and necessitates the selection of an outgoing variable and an incoming variable,
criterion of which is developed as follows:

• The basic solution becomes a feasible solution if all the elements of L ( = 1 b) s-

are non -negative. According to the dual simplex method, the variable corre-
sponding to the most negative element of L should leave the basis to attain feasi-
bility· Suppose r 1h eIcmcn l o f L 1s
· t h c most negative one, say ( L) r ' then r'lt
 Table 2 (,..,n,•1~11, ,"1 i ~ ,~1r- • l , l , , •t ,
I
•
,, / I f I

ti ,' I 11 I ,,.r, ,,, t>r l by

1

l ,t . ,,~,, , , tcnm t,I I,

1 """
a. . , d, ,in\, \ h,,,,, n l,, dH 1 '"'fa lo"-Cr II\ lcH Id n
tr t
• • n1,,1, nn~II • I I I l 3"-1' ,,,n,t lhf 1hr ((lf\\ lf unt
C \ll Ill •f fr ,m r ,blc 2

H lh II
. ..•\ H '
l'

'""h,ch c,n
1, ,t, ,,f . ,nh111;,n th:rn I 1hl\ l lh\; rq,rr .en• •t- •
l"lj' , I t•, . 11,1 . 1h.1l Ill
I l' ,pe, t ,·. d·, . \', hc! l l'
l l,~ IJ ( I J N,

I. 2,
'
• (I \\ ~
r ! (

ff I I <)Ill 1.1 h, ~ ,I I ,} '

• l' I'> "b,l' l\(d th.it thl' tr,111 ,torrrn.:<l , l I U\:'
~
/i .R ,
I
H
ll \\t ,c.:t H ,\
\111
.11hl tht

ib :h .
tr ,lll\ll Ir llh'J .. ,dlll'
() .tllll H b
,t Ii
L. , thi.:n () , l!,
I' B

u .. n~fo:mcd :< <) .11, d () 1, 1r.111-..lorm.:d tu (J

(} U) • (). (/
A , ~h , ill;"'<- ~cu n1t:h 1)J , ,t.irtl ,i \\1th ,111
1Jcnt lly 111 ,llrl\ a, art 1111 t1 ..tl ba .. 1, ma•r ,<
d e p10-'.. .t. ! :c1 .. 1 tl ,n,rr ~c' l'.' u,lJ 1u1 thl tr
c1n,tl) ClllJll ll!l ut H Q. an<l l . d) lI1
Jn'J~ l(\l \...J1t1\\ n B Q, Jnd L ming the prod uct torm o t 1nvl:
r,1on ,
!3nd l l'.l ll be' ,ump utcJ J') H l: H , () l:: CJ an<l 1 1
f. L when:: .
.• re Ilic' 11J1, ~1urm cJ , .\luc~ 01 H
' (J, and L, n:<,pl'.Ct!Vd) dOd E:. 1s
Ut , !H!llfl >.

'!\ comp _1c- the> m:11m. 1 u:.c 13 'P,. a::. the

cnta ing vector 1n the curr tnt lltra uon
~L t l c 1 ~ . n 11 1 ~ ,. 1d c n 111 y ina 111x
wh o~c ,1' colu mn t' > replaced by

lf3 1P>r)
(B Ip" ) l
II
, whete (H 1p,1 ) , ) 0

·1hc'IHC 'lll 1 J 1) 1 !O ,) It 1,• 1.,,Jp ) ( I I j

t I {HI(/( ! J> t ()(} t' III , I 111
\ ) I
P,1 ) I
) ! 1 u~cU l 11, e u , w, )l' (l/ ,, 1t1 i1111-... l
 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF MATHEMATICAL AND MANAGEMENT SCIENCES (9 75

Table 3. Intermediate simplex-type tabl e.

xB

TN
(/I l N)1 I (/l I
p,, )1(11 1 N),
(13 1
b)1 1 (f3 1p,,)/ B 1 b ),
(/l I N), (B 1 b ),

Pro4 Substituting ( B 1p_,, )r - - I in (9), we get

(13 1/J.1 1) 1
(a -'ps,) 2
I/ =
- 1

( 3 - 1Pst ) 111 -1- n

which itself is the entering vector B- 1Psi. Hence E =

1 1
(e 1, ... , er- 1, B- p 51, e,-1- 1, .. . , e111 -1- 11 ) = E- . This proves the theorem .

By Theorem 1, the transformed values of B- 1 , Q and L can be computed by simply

, - I , ,
multiplying an 11-matrix i.e., B = EB - 1 , Q = EQ and L = EL .
Theorem 2. The MFL algorithm is free from pivotal degeneracy which may cause cycling.

Proof It is well known that whenever any element of RHS is zero at any intermediate
iteration, the subsequent iterations become degenerate, resulting in cycling. Although,
cycling is rare in practice, for the guaranteed termination of an algorithm without cycle,
lexicographic strategy is used (Nocedal & Wright, 2006). To select the leaving variable,
search for a variable with the most negative entry as our aim is to replace the negative
(not zero) entries of RHS. For an entering variable, a non -basic variable associated with
minimum time takes the place of an outgoing variable, which make the RHS strictly
positive. Hence, the algorithm is free from pivotal degeneracy.

It does not mean that an optimal solution would always be non-degenerate. The
problem with redundancy may have some RHS = 0, as constraint matrix is assumed to
have full row rank.

4. 1. Optimality Criterion
The MFL solution seeks the existence of unknown parameters in the basis at pos1t1ve
level. Their existence in basis prevents the solution from becoming optimal for a nom -
inal problem . But, they can be driven out of the basis by multiplying the respective con-
straint by -1 to create infeasibility. This step compels that parameter to leave the basis.
Then, the selection of an entering variable moves the solution toward the feasibility.
This way a basic feasible solution, free from unknown parameters at positive level, can
be obtained. Therefore, the optimality criterion of the solution to a feasible TMTP-MC
is L 2 0 having no p's with L > 0. The maximum of the corresponding transportation
time is the optimal time of transportation.
 76 (9 5. AGARWAL AND 5. SHARMA

s. Algorithm
The algorithm for r--.tFL ns well 11.~ nplim,11 .~ol11tlo11 of 'l'MTI' M<: i•, a 1, follqws :

~ll'p 0: (11ili,1li1;1li1111 .

l \111\'Crl the 111Pdl'i nl Ti'vlTI' r--.,H : into till' :,t.111clard 111ockl of I' 'l'MTI' M< , a-, 111 /'1)

11, t'i 11 d ., 11, .,~,·, '/' 11. /''". /,, /l a 11d N . Set /. /, a 11d () N.
j
~ll'p I: lkll'rmi11atin11 11( k.iv ing v,11iahle .

r 1( I :::: 0, g1) 111 sl1'p ,I, Othnwisc, seard1 (!.), 111i11 { (l ,)k, k I , 2 .. . m t n} wh e re,
I
,- ' v,1ri,1bk 1)f ,u is leaving v,1riahlc.
11

~It'!' ~: Delt"rminalion of enll'ring variable .

Sc,1r~·h 1_, 1 = min h/ {t ij E TN: (Q,j\ = - 1} where, Xs i is the entering variable. Here ,
Q,1 <.knotes the column vectors of Q for all i E I and j E /. If all (Ou), 2 0, then the
rrobkm has no feasible solution.

Step 3: Update of matrices.

• - I • • •

Update the matrices B- 1, Q and L as B = EB - , Q = EQ and L = EL respectively

1 ,
8 8
where, E is the 11-matri.x and denotes the transformation . Also, update x , x N , T and
T"', accordingly. Then, go to step I .

Step 4: Determination of MFL solution.

If there is no parameter (say,P;o/ Po} in x with L > 0, then the MFL solution does
8

not exist (i.e., the solution cannot be decreased further) and the solution obtained is
optimal to the nominal problem. Then, go to step 6. Otherwise, compute MFL transpor-
tation time, T = max{ tiJ : tiJ E T , x =I= 0} with the basic variables x = L. For optimal -
8 8 8

ity, go to step 5.

Step 5: Removal of parameters.

1 1
Determine a leaving parameter by transforming (L), - - (L),, (B - ), - -(B- ),
and (Q), - -(Q), where, r denotes the position of leaving parameter. Then, go to step
2. Ties can be broken arbitrarily.

Step 6: Determinat ion of an optimal solution .

Compute the optimum transportati on time, 'f = max { !;1 : tij E 1' \ xH i- O} with basic
1

variables xll = L.
In this method, an iteration is a cycle from Step I lo Step 3 of the algorithm and
convergence of the algorithm depends upon the finiteness of the number of iterations.
 AMERIC AN JOURNAL OF MA 1HEMAl ICAL
AN D MANA GEMENT SCIE NCES 9 77

,tlo11 t,1hlP wi th mlxrd rnn~traints

Table 4. A 3 x 5 time_mi11imi7atlo11 t1,111~pn1t.
l ~
Supply
_ __ __ __ 1_
(, II 1, 10 _, 80
1 II
q 11 'I 1, 120
2 Il 'I 1'10
11 11) II
3
~ll '111 ,,o 110 fl()
Pt>rll ,1f1 d

,1 /i1111,· 1111111/J1 r of 1f <' rol1 1m , .

111/1111 l< ' r 111111r1lt ' 1 1111, n1 /11//y 111
1

Tlll'( H l'lll .\ , / he ,\ 1/'I .il,1;, 1

dege nera cy, ii d(I C\ n11t cycle,

/'1 ,1<' 1 ~rnf f , 1hr i\ffl ,ilµ1 111t h lll b IIL'l' lro111 pi vol.d
1mpr(Jved
ft':-ult rn ~ m tlw µua1,111trcd tn111inatio
11 . 111 .111 algorithm, ,1 ha '> ll c, r, lut1r,n 1<;
num ber
. l11 ., prulilc111 of fi111tc \izc m / n , the
till 11 l'r " 'llh':- ,1 h.1~1 c (c.,~ihk solu1io11
·
L,t t,.1~k ~L,lu t1 om
. ,11l' at most ('"III I
I
11111) . Out of. which, \ornc arc bac,i c feas ible
II
11 I
I
arc ( m ~ n mn ) , which
~nlu tions i.e., .,tm0s t thc num bn or basic feasible solutions m -! n
is also finite .
1:- t1nitc . Sub ~equ rntly, the m1mbcr of itera tions

6. Num eri ca l Illustrat ion

part
, equipment and relief supplies from one
In emergency services, moving medicine the
major logistical challe nges . To demonstrate
of the country to another is one of the ID - 19
rithm, let us consider the case of COV
practical applicability of the proposed algo that
whole world was under a lockdown. At
pandemic outbreak in the world when the s,
ations, some airlines offered their reso urce
time, due to the suspension of all flight oper -
s and services from different sources to des
aircraft and crew to transport essential good e
rein a government wants to transport som
tinations. Vie are considering a case whe supp lies
view of an emergency such perishable
medicinal supplies to other countries . In -
medicina l requirement to combat the pan
need to be delivered in time to meet the ons
shipped from three sources to five destinati
demic. Suppose these supplies are to be inati on
s) from source i (i = 1, 2, 3) to dest
by an airplane whose travel times (in hour rwal
4. This problem is reproduced from Aga
j U= I, 2, 3, 4, 5) are given in Tab le
and Sharma (2014, 2020).
unknown parameters, we get
After introducing the slack variables and
]' ;
XB = [5 10 520 P3o Po, 502 Po3 504 sos
yJJ = [0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0];
X25 X3 1 X32 X33 X34 X_\5 1';
X22 X23 X24
x"' = [ xii X12 X13 XJ4 X1 5 X2J

7 11 10 8 13 9 l;
yN - ls 6 8 6 10 9 8 9 6
1

140 - '10 - 40 - 60 80 - 80 ]' = L; B = !~( = B )

b = [80 - 120
,,
78 9 S. AGARWAL AND S. SHARMA

I I (l () () () () () () () () 0
0 0 (l () (l I I I I I () () () 0 ()
() (l () \l () () (l (l () () I I I
1 () () () \\ I () () () () () () () ()
and .\' - () () () () () I () () () () I () 0 ()
Q

() () I () () ll () I () () () () I () ()

() 0 () I () () () (l I () () () () I ()

() () \) () I () () l) () I () () () (J I

~ \"
Hnc,
i;
)' -
'I)'
/l]\1
- \ ,H)

Nl,\\',
.,t I

l<J11 )_,
\ i ,l' ., the .\rd v,1rinhlc ol ,\ 11 i!, th e lt.:,1vi11 g v,tr1 <1b lc and
l<J,.,) ' (()11 ) 1 (<) ,\ i) I ({ ), ·, ) I I \ o, 111
min{ l 1. l 0. ~'
u . Y}- ~ ,rnd thcrl'i<.H'l'. the rntning v,, riahlc, x_,1 is x.11.
() () () () I () 0 (J () () () (J
ll () ()

ll I 0 0 0 () () () 0 0 () 0 () () u
() () - I () () () () ()
0 0 - \ () () 0 () 0
0 0 0 I 0 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 l 0 0 () 0
\\'e h;1w, f = ; Jj = Elr 1
= 0 () I 0 0 0
0 0 () 0 l 0 0 () 0 0
0 0 - 1 0 0 0 () 0 0 - 1 0 0 l 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

1 1 I 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 - I 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 I 1 I
-1 0 0 0 0 - 1 0 0 0 0 - 1 0 0 0 0
and Q = EQ = - I 0
0 - 1 0 0 0 0 - 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 - 1 0 0 0 0 - 1 0 0 I I 0 l l
0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 - 1 0 0 0 0 - I 0 0 0 0 - I

Thus, i = EL = [80
- 120 140 -40 - 40 80 80 -80 ]'. Now T 8 is updated
by replacing the time "O" corresponding to the y d variable with time "8" correspo nding
to the basic variable "x 33 ." This results in
x8 = [S1 0 S20 X33 Poi S02 Po3 S04 sos ]' ; TB = [ 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 o]
J'' = [X1 I X12 X13 X1 4 X15 X21 X22 X23 X24 X25 X3 1 X3 2 P 3o X34 X35 ]' ;

and T"" = [ 8 6 8 6 10 9 8 9 6 7 11 10 O 13 9] .
Continue to execute steps 1 to 3 in a similar way to obtain updated £, 3 - 1 , Q, L,
13 such that
x , xN, yB and y N values. After four iterations, all elements of Lare positive
8
L = [o 40 140 40 40 80 40 80]';x = [s,o X 24 X 33 X11 X12 PoJ So~ X2 sl'

and r/J = [O 6 8 8 6 0 0 7].

Since, the parameter p 03 exists in x1 and possesses a positive value (i.e., 80), MFL
1

paradox cxi~ts. The MfL transportation time is 'J' - max{6, 8, 8, 6, 0, 7} - 8 with

Xi 1 = 40, X12 = 40, X2,i = 40, x25 = 80 an<l x3_1 -= 140.
Clearly, for a transport ation tlow
 I AMERICAN JOURNAL OF MATHEMATICAL AND MANAGEMENT SCIENCES @ 79
I
Table 5. Computational behavior of proposed algorithm for optimal and MFL solution of different-
I sized TMTP-MCs.
I Objective time No. of lt ern tiom Flow of trnn-.portat ion Hun time (in sec)
Size (m x n) Max. Time Optltnill MrL Optltnnl Ml L Optlrn,11 Ml L Optlm.il Mf'L
4x 3 12 7.57 6.38 4.16 4.07 19.22 L 1,4·1 0./J0~ 0 002
4x 5 20 11 .81 9.94 7 03 5.49 41 Ii
5x 5 25 12.83 11 .13 7)1
4 ~) 0.0 1 oorn
5,99 '.,J 111 Cd i', () () 11 ()()()1
8x 6 48 24.3 19.82 12.14 8 HJ 144.6 1(,',J 0011 () ()()',

'
8-: 10 80 36.64 28.38 15.96 11.48 311 .81 3'.l'J.2 0 OLL 0 ()(17
10 , 10 100 39.59 31.8 19.18 12.S l! 446.56 487.1/ 0 OLf, 0 ()(17
15 , 12 180 59.09 48.90 25 .53 16,86 106, .'.13 1189,48 0,03'., 0 014
15 ,20 300 88.08 70.47 32.99 22 .18 1196.84 2538 49 0.05~ 0 Oil
20, 20 400 101 .69 83 .02 38,75 25.3 1 34,0.47 3847.35 0.064 0 031
30,24 720 154.14 126.05 55 ,18 34.45 8152 .01 9197 .06 0 137 0 043
30 , 40 1200 224.1 178.34 73 .79 45 .29 18317 .82 20281\ .5 0.2 11 0073
40,40 1600 247 .69 201.81 81 .77 50.57 27832 .25 30663.7 0) 6] 0 113
60,45 2700 363 .68 297 .19 108.88 67 .24 6 1331.5 68770,6 0.436 0 )27
60,S0 4800 506.36 416.78 153.89 89 .27 145398.4 162923 0.827 0 49 3
S0 i-. 80 6400 571 .98 465.11 161 101 .14 219426 ,5 245428 1 156 0.79 5
l00 x l00 10000 763.35 616.06 204 .22 127.5 430960.6 480732 2.733 1.826

of 340 units, MFL time of shipment is 8 hours, which is an optimal solution to the P-
TMTP -MC.
Now for the optimal solution, proceed to step 5. The only unknown paramete r in xH
with L > 0 is p03 (at the 6th position), so transform (L) - -( L\, (B - 1 \-.-( B 1)6
6
and (Q) 6 - -(Q) to let the 6th paramete r out of the basis . This gives the transform ed
6
matrices as follows:

L= [o 40 140 40 40 -80 40 80 ]';

1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0
0 -1 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 - 1 0 0 0 0 0
~ - I 0 0 0 -1 0 0 0 0
B = 0 0 0 0 - 1 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 - 1 0 0
0 1 0 0 0 0 1 -1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1
0 0 1 1 1 -1 -1 0 0 0 -1 -1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 -1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 - 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 l 1
1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
and Q= 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 -1 - 1 0 - 1 - 1
0 0 0 l -1 -1 - 1 0 0 0 0 0 l l
0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
Again, execute the steps to 3 until all elements of L are positive. After an iteration,
we get
,,.
80
@ S. AGARWAL AND S. SHARMA

Table 6. Computational behavior of proposed algorithm for optimal

and MFL solution of different-
sized TMTPs.
Objective Ti me No. of ltcrc.1tlons Flow of transportation Run Time (in sec)
Size (m x n) Max. Time Optimal MFL Optlmill MFL Optimal MFL Optima l MF L
4x 3 12 7.47 6.54 4.69 4.74 14 ,01 20.31 0.005 0.00 3
4x 5 20 11 .77 9.61 6.15 6.23 21.1 3 33.59 0.005 0.004
5X 5 25 13.44 10.85 6.99 6.7 24 40.05 0.006 0.004
8x6 48 24 .24 18.73 10.16 9.89 48.25 80.36 0.008 0.005
8 X 10 80 34.62 26 .65 13.01 12.57 72.71 129 .79 0.01 0.005
10 :--. 10 100 38.09 29.36 15.29 13.79 86.24 15 1.44 0.02 1 0.010
15 X 12 180 68.39 47 .67 23.39 19.7 165 .57 286.62 0.029 0.017
15 X 20 300 107.9 67.98 33.04 24 .99 291.71 493.67 0.032 0.028
20 X 20 400 107 ,63 76.7 1 37.02 27 .88 332.99 592.7 0.04 0.034
30 X 24 720 188.35 117 .62 52.3 1 38.35 633.47 11 38.14 0.063 0,043
30 X 40 1200 329.4 1 163.8 71.74 50,17 1094 ,92 2000.41 0.139 0.074
40 X 40 1600 297 .91 188.96 72.87 56.34 1135.4 2285 .72 0.21 0.123
60 X 45 2700 682.72 270.99 11 4.47 75 .34 2426.47 449 5.64 0.463 0,206
60 X 80 4800 1234.09 392.21 147 .26 100.49 4202 .9 8003.21 0.946 0.481
80 x 80 6400 687 .77 423.21 174 .18 112.82 . 4744 .97 90 10.87 1.715 0.845
100x 100 10000 939.02 572.186 202.84 141.4 6586 ,96 14025 3.514 1.808

L = [ 4o 80 60 40 0 80 40 0 }' ; x 8 = [ 510 X24 X33 X11 X1 2 X3 5 X22 X25 ]';

8
and T = LO 6 8 8 6 9 8 7] · .
. . . .
Now, there is no unknown parameter m x 8 , thus the solution
obtain ed 1s optima l to
the TMTP -MC and we move to step 6, i.e., T = max{ 0,
6, 8, 8, 9, 8 } = 9 with
x 11 = 40, x22 = 40, x24 = 80, x33 = 60 and x = 80. Here, the
35 flow of transportatio n is
300 units in 9 hours of shipment time. Hence the results infer
that by analyzing the
MFL paradox, we can ship 40 more units of load and reduce
shipm ent time by l hour.
Using the parametric formulation of TMTP-MC (i.e., P-TMT
P-MC), the optimality for
the nominal problem can be further improved until the optima
lity for P-TMT P-MC
is obtaine d.

7. Experimental Analysis

The proposed algorithm was coded in Matlab 7.0 for both, TMTP
-MC as well as TMTP
and the experiments were conducted using Intel Core i3 6006
U 2.0 GHz processor with
4 GB RAM on 64-bit windows operat ing system . The algorit hm
was successfully verified
by solving a set of random ly generated instances across differe
nt combinations of m
and n. We ran the algorit hm by considering different rando
mly generated values of
inp ut param eters i.e., time matrix , supply and demand values
having restrictions. The
values of t;1, a; and b1 were drawn fro m a un iform distrib utio
n from l to mn .
The computational behavior of proposed algorit hm for optima
l as well as MFL solu -
tion of aro und 8000 random ly generated problems for each of
TMTP -MC and TMTP ,
respectively is summarized in Tables 5 and 6. The empirical
analysis is presen ted by
reporting the average values of all the entries taken over 500
instan ces fo r each of the
16 variou s-sized cases. Here, MFL refers to the objective solu tio
n of P-TMTP-MC.
. For diffe rent-sized TMTP-MC and TMTP, the profiles for
run time and object ive
time of transportation are shown in Figure l , in which it can
be seen that MFL curve
lies below the optima l curve. This indicates that the value of
objective ti me and run
 AMERICAN JOURN AL OF MATH EMATICAL AND MANAGEMENT SCIENCES @ 81

Table 7. Average number of Iterations, objective time, maximum ti me and run time taken by the
proposed algorithm for optimal and MFL solution of different-sized TMTP-MC as well as TMTP .
% decre.ise In no. % Increase in fl ow of
% dern•.1,e In objective time of Iterations transrortatlon % decrease in ru n ti me

Size (111 , n) TMTP-MC TMTP TMTP-MC TMTP TMTP-MC TMTP TMTP-MC TMTP
15.75 12.42 14.45 - 1.07 11.52 41\ .99 67.35 1\3.4 1
4,-1
15 .87 18.37 21.96 - 1.37 8.32 58.98 71.56 30.53
4,5
13.22 19.3 17.5 1\. 15 18.49 66.88 68 .24 17.48
5, 5
66.56 57 .49 35.58
I
I
$,6
$, 10
10, 10
18.42
22.53
21.5
22.73
23.03
22.9 1
27 .27
28,07
34.43
2.66
3.35
9.78
14 .32
14.46
9.08
78 .5 1
75 .6
69.72
73 .91
50.01
52.23
11 .95 73 .11 61 .04 39.94
15, 12 17.25 30.3 33.94 18.48
10.52 69.23 61 .29 12.36
15,20 19.99 37 32 .76 24.37
12.48 77.99 51 .67 14.92
20,20 18.35 28.73 34,67 24 .7
12.51 79.67 68.85 31 .4 1
30,24 18.22 37.55 37.58 26.68
10.74 82.7 65.56 46.58
30 x 40 20.42 50,28 38.62 30.06
10.17 101.31 56.95 41 .45
40 x l\0 18.52 36.57 38.15 22.69
12.13 85 .27 48.02 55.4 1
60,45 18.28 60.31 38.24 34.1 9
12.05 90.42 40.46 49.18
60 ls S0 17.69 68.22 41.99 31.76
11 .85 89.9 31 .28 50.75
S0 x S0 18.68 38.47 37.18 35.2 3
11 .55 112.92 33.1 8 48.55
l00 x 100 19.29 39.07 37.5 7 30.29

;;1;:
1000
3,0

2.5 800
Optimal time
u
(I) 2.0 -~ MFL time
(I)
~ 600
(I)
E
,.::;
E 1.5 _J
:;, u..
~
C
2 400
1.0 ro
~ .§
.8 C.
0 200 0
0.5
en
>
<(
0.0

-0.5
2000 4000 6000 8000 10000

Size

4.0 1400

u(I)
3.5

3.0

2.5
ptimaltlmV \?
~O
-.t!- - MFL time ! <1>
1200

1000

I ; /'.
~ (I)
(I)
800 ]
~ 2.0 _J
C u..
2 1.5
600 E
~ ro
.8 1.0
. ;_..L J::~:-::-:..-··::.·::..---~- 400
_§
0 C.
en
> 0.5
/'<~ '> _:::.;~-
✓.....
... ~,,..... • ,,
.-· · 0
<( 200

0.0 ,,t.-:.,-•·· . j- • - Run time (optimal )1

I • Run time (MFL)
0
-0.5
2000 4000 6000 8000 10000

Size

Figure 1. Computation time (sec) and objective time versus size (number of cells) of TMTP-MC (upper
panel) and TMTP (lower panel), for optimal and MFL solutions.
82 9 5. AGARWAL AND S, SHARMA

4.0

35

3 (l
u
I•
(l)
~ :.,5
(l)
Optlmnl
• Ml L
1
C
10
I

2 15
"§
9
\0
0
Ol
> 05
<l'.
•
00

-0 .5
50 100 150 200
No . of iterations

4.0

35

3.0
u
(!)
~ 2.5 * Optimal
(!)
-■- MFL
~ 2.0
C:
2 1.5
ro
§
1.0
0
en
> 0.5
<!
0.0

-0.5
50 100 150 200
No. of iterations
Figure 2. Computation time (sec) versus number of iterations needed for optimal as well as MFL
solution of TMTP-MC (upper panel) and TMTP (lower panel) .

time in parametric form of the problem will be lower than in its original form .
Although no such improvement is observed for TMTP of size less than 400 cells, but
beyond it, the run time is reduced by approximately 55% for TMTP and 74% for
TMTP-MC. Total run time (in sec) in comparison with number of iterations for both
variants (in Figure 2) shows that the proposed algorithm under the special case of MFL
contributes to the number of iterations. Both trends are same when the iteration count
is less than 50, but as the number of cells increases, the number of iterations and the
computational time, both decrease. The proflle for transportation flow in contrast of
objective time, as shown in Figure 3, indicates that a slight increase in the amount of
commodities to be transported may result in sizeable reduction in the objective time.
This analysis shows that exploring the MFL solution of the problem is lucrative in
terms of shipment time, run time as well as the number of iterations. Moreover, it indi -
cates the feasibility and suitability of proposed method for both, TMTP -MC and TMTP.
 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF MATHEMATICAL AND MANAGEMENT SCIENCES 9 83

500000
. 600

400000 fl()(J
I Opll1nnl 11111n \
C \ ~~ Ml I limn
,1 '11
g /
~
~ '.\0\\000
~00 -'

,~
/
8.Ul lL

C
l\'I
!:, 21)0000
/ ~:' ::;,

1g_
,l)',f
0 200
3 / 0
.2 /
\J_ /
/
1\10000 ,,.,, /
■ Opllmnl flow
. 0
I' • MFL flow
, .... -,--,---,--,-~-,--, - -. -
2000 ~000 0000 11000 10000

Size

1400

14000 1200

12000 1000
Cl)
C
0
·-;
10000 800 _§
..J
t: \J_
0 8000
0.
U')
600 ~
C ro
~ E
6000 400 '6_
0 0
3
0 4000
u:: 200

2000

6000 8000 10000

2000 4000
Size

Figure _ Flow of transportation and objective time versu_s size (number of cells) of TMTP-MC (upper
3
panel) and TMTP (lower panel), for optimal and MFL soluttons.

□ Objective time
D No. of iterations
ElliJ Runtime TMTP
TMTP-MC
100 -
90
80
70
~
(II
60
~ 50
~ 40
I ,J ~ ~
'O 30 I
?ft 20
I

'~ I, I
' - II II
0 II
0
Ir 1rl l\. II II II

~ 1~ ~0<D "'g ~0
M
)( "'~ ~ ~ 0 0 N 0
~ ~
0
"'N 0 0 0
8 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ gX gX 8~
>< ~ ~ ~ ro X ~
)(
><
"' "' ~
X X
~ "' 0
N
0
(') (')
"' 8
X
(X)
X
~ ~ ~ 6N g g
X
~
X
g g g 8
Instance size: mxn Instance size: mxn ~

Figure 4. Average percentage decrease in the objective time, number of iterations and run time for
MFL solution of TMTP-MC and TMTP.

Figure 4 shows that considering MFL solution may result into 40-80% reduction in
computation time for TMTP -MC and 10-70% for TMTP (refer to Table 7) . A signifi -
cant decrease in run time is observed in 13 out of 16 different -sized TMTP-MC (refer
~9 !i•I 5. AGARWAL AND S. SHARMA

(() Table 5) while in TMTP, a diminution in run time as well as

in objective shipm ent
ti!l1C is noted in 8 out of 16 cases (refer to Table 6). The
results do not seem to be
cncmin1ging for TMTP, and it is also noticed that the
reduction in run time is only
55% because all constraints in it are of equality type, makin
g it less flexib le for the
parameters in optimal solution at positive level.

( 8. Concluding Remarks

In this article, a uni11ed algorithm is proposed lo analyze and resolv

e lhe MFL paradox -
ical situation in TMTP-MC. The algorithm is designed in
such a way that first il identi-
fies and finds the paradoxical solution and then it solves the
nominal problem to obtain
its optimal solution. This algorithm is applicable to TMTP
also. The outcome of this
study leads to a significant decrease in computation time
as well as objective shipm ent
lime in comparatively less number of iterations. Under the
special case of MFL para-
doxical situation, the study is therefore prominent.
The technique proposed in this article can be further exten
ded to solve bi -objective
transportation problems where the objectives of minimizing
both the time and cost are
involved. Our future research directions include exploring
the MFL paradox in multi-
choice time minimization transportation problems. It would
also be interesting to ana-
lyze the paradoxical situations where the parameters vary within
some intervals.

Acknowledgments

The au'.hors are thankful to the referees for careful reading of the
suggestions that helped to improve the article in its present form. manuscript and their valuable

ORCID

Swati Agarwal @ http://orcid.org/OOOO -OOOi -61 77- 1376

References
Agarwal, S., & Sharma S (2014) A
' ·
pro blem with mixed constra · n open toop method for t' · · • .
ints [Pape . ime mmimizing transportation
Agarwal, S., & Sharma S (2018) A . r_presentation] . Proceedings of APMSCSET 83-89
1 .h ' . .
em wit mixed constraints. lnternnm11111n ax method for time . . . .
tiona/ Joi I ,r C
' .
mmimizmg transportation prob-
1-6 irna 01 omputer & M th
. · .
a emat1ca/ Scienc
Agarwal, S., & Sharma, S. (2020) A h es 7(3)
l .h . s ootout method for r .. ' ,
3e;~ wit mixed constraints. American Journal o M tlime ~m1m
izing transportation prob-
App} ~-2:,-(31 ~~3lt{~://doi.org/l 0. ~ 080/0 I 966324.2lo.1;3~e;:11ca/
nnd Management Sciences,
. e transportation pr bl .
(1970-1977), 24(1), 79-99 h . . o em and its variants. 0 eration
Arsham, H. (1992) p ·. tt~s.//do1.org/10.2307/3008037
· ostoptimality analys p al Research Quarterly
0 pernliona/
Research Societ f h
es o t e transportation rob
Arsh,1111, H., & Oblak M ( y, 43(2), 121-139. https://doi.or /10 2
p !em. The Journal of the
to sensitivity, para;net~ic 19:o~:~:)erturbation analysis of ge~erai ~po:~Sd
8e~~-57 .
Modelling, 13(8) 79-102 '1 'nee, and more-for-less anal . Iv . A unified approach
' . Htps:/ /doi .org/ I 0. IO 16/0895-7I77(9~s)i;~071;_1~ematica/ and Comp
uter
 I ,, (,,. ) II',
Ill Al ANI I MANl \t ,I Ml NI •,1 II I'll
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF MArl II MA

() ,,, 11 ,, ,•.,,. ,1 /ti (',

min - max prob lem . 1/.l'itst! 11 //f 1:;; 1 1 111 1111 11 111 1· '
Bansal, S., & Puri, M ._ C. (198 0) . A 19!9 2 ,16
J,
191-200. https ://do 1.org /l0 . l007 /1\F0 I .
l' i'or lilllt' 1111 11 1, 11 1, ,,,11 1111 1,,11 •q,, ,, 1:,
Bhatia, H. bl L., Swar up, K., & Puri, M . C. (19 77 ). .A pn1<·L'dur
. I _, . I . a I C(/· P11rc 1111cl t\ppl,ccl Mr1th l'l11,,tlr~, H(H), '>20 ') }.') .
t10n pro em . llct1<111 011111 wli It Ii 111,. , t, 1,,, 11.1 111 1,, ar,· t, 1
nt of .Ihe t rans11nrlat inn 1irnhl 1• 111 111
Brigd. en, M. E. 13. ( 1974) . A . varie ,1,1•I, II II ,,•, : // I I111 ,1,q, 11 , )
1a/ l{cs1• 11rc/1 Silrlt '/)' , ~- . ,1 I'/
J•,( \) ,
nuxc d type . Jo11rnal oj th e Opcrntw1 • ,
1057 /j ors.l 974.77
di~trihutirn1 111od ck <:11/lir· n
( Char nes, A.,& . Klin gma n, D. (197
1). Tht· 'mor l' -for -less ' parad ox in
rl11 Ce11tre D Et11rles Rec/1erc/1e Opemtio11
11cllc, IJ, 11 - 22 .
bottl enec k lran spor talio n prob l c111
. Nr,v11I /l c~et1nl,
I
1) . The
Garf in_ke!, R. S., & Rao , M . R. (197 .100 2/nav .3800 18(Jtl ()tl
://do i. o rg/10
Logistics Q11artcrly, 18(4 ), 465- 472. https plu ~ fra ct1011 al
a, R. (201 9) . Opti mum cost -lim e trade -off pairs in a fra ctio11al
Gup ta,~· • & Aror cs tigac i un Opcm cionrd, 10
with restr icted 0ow . Hcvista f11v
capa c1tat ed trans port~ tion prob lem 0/ AON E?u =ano n ~ 4Jdf ,18b7 &~id - googlc
pps/ doc/ A6124 7608
( 1), 46-6 0 . https ://hn k.ga le.co m/a
Scho lar& xid= Sce2 5b9f . pany .
Hadl ey, G . (196 2) . Li11ear progrnm11
1i11g . Addi son- Wes ley Publi shing Com
tion prob lems . Nava l Resea rch Logistics
mizi ng trans porta
Ham mer, P. L. (196 9). Tim e mini
o rg/ I 0.1002/ nav.3 800 160307
Qua rterly, 16(3 ), 345- 357. https :/ /doi. prob lem and some
icati on on the botll en cck trans porta tion
Ham mer, P. L. (19 7 1). Com mun Nava l Resea rch Logis tics Quarterly, 18(4 ),
n prob lem .
rema rks on the time tran spor tatio
.3800180406
487- 490. https : / / doi .o rg/10 .100 2 / nav es to num erou s local -
distr ibuti on of a prod uct from several sourc
Hitc hcoc k, F. L. ( 194 I) . The https :/ /doi. org/1 0.10 02/
ities. Journal of Math emat ics
and Physics, 20( 1-4), 224- 230.
sapm l941 2012 24 with mixe d cons train ts.
4) . The trans porta tion prob lem
Klin gma n, D., & Russ el, R. (197 org/ 10.2307 /3007931
0-19 77), 25(3), 447- 455 . https :/ /doi.
Operational Research Quarterly (197 ) . Susta inabl e trans porta tion plan -
ta, P., & Aggarwal, U. (2019
Meh lawa t, M . K., Kann an, D ., Gup prob lem . Annals of
ge mult i -obje ctive trans porta tion
ning for a three -stag e fixed char
10.1007/s 1047 9-01 9-03 451- 4
Operations Research. https :/ /doi. org/ i.org /10.1 007/ 978-
J. (200 6) . Num erical optimization. Sprin ger. https ://do
Noce dal, J., & Wrig ht, S.
0-38 7-40 065- 5. An intui tive expl anati on.
less para dox in distr ibuti on mod els:
Robb , D. J. (1990). The more -for- 0 .1080 /074 0817 9008 9641 92
:/ /doi. org/1
IIE Transactions, 22(4 ) , 377- 378. https A. (2017 ). Coni c scala rizat ion appr oach to
W., & Gok, S. Z.
Roy, S. K., Mait y, G., Web er, G. with inter val goal. Annals of
e trans porta tion prob lem
solve mult i-cho ice mult i-obj ectiv 83 -4
https :/ /doi. org/ I 0. 1007 /s l 0479 -0 I 6-22
Operations Research, 253(1 ), 599- 620. prob lem with mult iple para mete rs. Anna ls
riteri a trans porta tion
Sing h, S., & Sing h, S. (201 8) . Bi-c 8-28 25-z
692 . https :// doi.o rg/10 .100 7 /s l047 9-01
of Operations Research, 269( 1-2), 667- Nava l Resea rch Logis tics Quarterly, 18(2),
tion para dox.
Szwa rc, W . (197 1a) . The trans porta
8001 8020 6
185- 202. https :/ /doi. org/ 10.1 002/ nav.3 l Research Logistics
e rema rks on the time trans porta tion prob lem. Nava
Szwa rc, W . ( 1971 b). Som
002/ nav.3800180405
Quarterly , J8( 4) , 473- 485. https :/ /doi .org/ 10.1