倉庫A,Bにある在庫の全量を店舗C,Dに輸送する。倉庫A,Bの在庫量がそれぞれ35個,15個,店舗C,Dの必要量がそれぞれ20個,30個であり,各倉庫から各店舗への1個当たりの輸送費が表のとおりであるとき,最小となる総輸送費は何万円か。 単位 万円/個
| 店舗C | 店舗D | |
|---|---|---|
| 倉庫A | 4 | 2 |
| 倉庫B | 2 | 1 |
This question's explanation and your answers so far.
倉庫A,Bにある在庫の全量を店舗C,Dに輸送する。倉庫A,Bの在庫量がそれぞれ35個,15個,店舗C,Dの必要量がそれぞれ20個,30個であり,各倉庫から各店舗への1個当たりの輸送費が表のとおりであるとき,最小となる総輸送費は何万円か。 単位 万円/個
| 店舗C | 店舗D | |
|---|---|---|
| 倉庫A | 4 | 2 |
| 倉庫B | 2 | 1 |
85 comes from assigning each warehouse only to its own cheapest route (A→D 2×35 = 70, B→D 1×15 = 15, total 85). But if both warehouses send everything to D, Store D receives 50 units and Store C receives 0, which fails to meet the requirements of C = 20 and D = 30. It is an infeasible lower bound, so it is wrong.
100 is below the achievable minimum cost of 110. It arises from an assignment that ignores the capacity constraint that Warehouse B holds only 15 units (assuming all 20 units for Store C are sent via the cheap B→C route). Because B→C can carry at most 15 units, this assignment does not hold.
正解 This is a transportation (optimization) problem. The A→C route is the most expensive (40,000 yen), so keeping the amount sent through it to a minimum is the key. Warehouse A ships out all 35 units of its inventory, but the amount it can route to the cheaper Store D (A→D is 20,000 yen) is capped at Store D's requirement of 30 units. The remaining 5 units must unavoidably go via the pricier A→C (40,000 yen). Store C's remaining 15 units are then covered by Warehouse B→C (20,000 yen), using up Warehouse B's 15 units of inventory exactly (B→D is 0 units). Total cost = A→C 4×5 + A→D 2×30 + B→C 2×15 + B→D 1×0 = 20 + 60 + 30 = 110 (in ten-thousand yen). This is the minimum value that satisfies the supply and demand constraints, so the correct answer is ウ “110”.
125 is the highest cost among feasible assignments. If you first cram all 15 units into B's cheapest route B→D, then all 20 units for Store C have to go via the pricier A→C (40,000 yen) (A→C 4×20 + A→D 2×15 + B→D 1×15 = 80 + 30 + 15 = 125). This is a typical mistake of over-prioritizing cheap routes so the total is not minimized; it is not the minimum cost.