Quantum and Quantum-Inspired Optimisation in Transport and Logistics: A Systematic Review
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThanks for the opportunity to review this manuscript. The topic, quantum computing applications in transportation and logistics, is timely and important, and the authors have made a commendable effort to summarize existing work. Nevertheless, several issues regarding the scope, completeness, and depth of the review require attention for the contribution to be fully realized.
A central concern is the ambiguity and inconsistency in the manuscript’s scope. It is not entirely clear whether the authors intend to survey quantum computing applications across the broader transportation and logistics domain (as suggested by the title) or whether the focus is specifically on optimization problems that arise within this domain (as suggested by the conclusion). These two directions lead to different expectations and scopes. If the goal is a comprehensive review of quantum applications in transportation and logistics, then the current manuscript is incomplete, as it concentrates almost exclusively on the supply side—vehicle routing, scheduling, resource allocation, and related operational problems. In transportation research, demand-side modeling is equally critical, encompassing areas such as travel behavior, demand forecasting, pricing strategies, and mode choice. Important developments in quantum cognition modeling and quantum discrete choice modeling, including early (around Year 2018) contributions published in Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, fall within this category and are not addressed by the authors. If these areas are within the intended scope, they should be incorporated; if not, the authors should clearly articulate a narrower, optimization-centered focus. However, even focusing on supply-side optimization, the literature on utilizing quantum computing technologies/mechanims for demand-side modeling and simulation should still be mentioned.
The current literature review also appears limited in breadth. A straightforward set of search terms, such as “quantum” combined with “transportation,” “transport,” “logistics,” or “mobility” would likely uncover the foundational papers on quantum cognition and discrete choice, along with any recent studies applying quantum-inspired methods to travel demand problems. Although the number of such works is currently small, omitting them leaves the impression of a fragmented landscape. Including these studies would offer a more balanced and accurate representation of how quantum perspectives are beginning to influence different layers of transportation systems.
In addition, the manuscript tends to remain at a high level when discussing quantum algorithms and their suitability for transport and logistics problems. Readers from both the transportation and computing communities would benefit from deeper exposition. Even brief mathematical formulations of the algorithms or illustrative mappings between canonical transportation problems and quantum optimization primitives would significantly enhance the rigor of the survey. At present, the treatment feels more descriptive than analytical, and strengthening the technical component would improve the paper’s overall credibility and usefulness.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe paper addresses an important and timely topic: the adoption of quantum (and quantum-inspired) optimisation in transport and logistics. The manuscript is generally well written, clearly structured, and uses an appropriate systematic-review framework (PRISMA). The barrier taxonomy (hardware, data, energy, organisational readiness) and the link to smart-mobility systems are valuable for the Smart Cities readership. However, several aspects of novelty positioning, methodological transparency, and depth of synthesis need strengthening before the paper is suitable for publication.
1. The paper claims to be “the first systematic review of quantum computing applications in transportation” (Introduction, contributions list). This needs a more careful positioning: Explicitly survey what prior surveys / tutorials / position papers exist on quantum optimisation in logistics, operations research, or smart mobility (even if they are not PRISMA-style SLRs). Clarify what is genuinely new here: e.g., focus on empirical studies with measured performance and energy, explicit barrier taxonomy, etc.
2. Currently the search is restricted to Scopus only. For a technology-oriented SLR, relying on one database introduces a non-trivial risk of missing relevant work (e.g., IEEE Xplore, Web of Science, ACM Digital Library, arXiv preprints that later became journal papers, etc.).
At minimum, the paper should: Justify why Scopus alone is sufficient, or extend the search to at least one other major database and report how many additional records (if any) this yields.
3. The manuscript states that the review “complies fully with PRISMA 2020” and that all procedural decisions were “pre-registered and executed without deviation” (Methodology). At present, these claims read strong but are not verifiable from the text.
4. Section 3 mentions quality assessment and reports Cohen’s kappa for screening, but the actual criteria and scoring scheme for study quality/risk-of-bias are not described in enough detail.
5. The paper rightly highlights that energy consumption and queue latency are underreported, and that the few existing measurements are unfavourable to quantum hardware.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsI thank the authors for attempting to summarize such a vast and varied topic. I greatly appreciate their effort, but as it stands, the work has many critical points.
The literature review is still lacking; the aims and purposes are mentioned, but the reading still seems superficial, partly due to the vastness of the topic. As proof of this, some of the most influential authors, who worked on VRP, have been excluded.
The body of the paper does not fully address the transportation and logistics domain or its associated problems. Even if the discussion paragraph generally offers an overview of the topic, some of the conclusion statements are not fully aligned with the current literature.
It might also be helpful to change the title so as to revise the objectives downwards.
Finally, the style of the graphs and tables is very rough. I recommend paying more attention to the layout.
Therefore, the work requires thorough revision, and I'll offer some Point-by-point suggestions:
Please try not use such a statement as in lines 27-28 “The review highlights the absence, yet development promise, of real-world deployments, standardized benchmarks, and comprehensive cost–benefit analyses”
At 10.1016/j.jocm.2021.100290 the authors can find an interesting case study over quantum utility modeling applied to traffic count. Similarly, 10.3389/ffutr.2025.1544947 considers the problem of path choice inn a small network.
The same papers offer the opportunity to refer to some pivotal works over the topic.
Just recently other works already address the problem of optimization as in 10.1007/s11128-025-04870-y (a review), 10.3390/math13172761 (vehicle routing), 10.1016/j.compeleceng.2025.110178 (traffic management) or 10.1007/s11128-020-02815-1, 10.1016/j.treng.2024.100247 (vehicle routing and transport systems optimization) just to cite a few.
Theen I suggest to revise the methodology through evaluating further literature including keywords considering as: path choice; traffic assignment; transport systems; travel demand, Quantum choice, hybrid quantum–classical mode and so on… on the contrary the analysis into Transportation and Logistics should results partial.
Moreover, considering th nature of th paper, and the topic studied, the section Background (Literature review) for each subparagraph only refers to a limited set of papers.
Each time a acronym is used to introduce a methods, an algorithm or a software the authors should cite the corresponding element in the literature…
NP-hard combinatorial problems linee 124
Quantum Approximate Optimisation Algorithm (QAOA), line 164
Variational Quantum Eigensolver (VQE), line 165
Quadratic Unconstrained Binary Optimisation (QUBO) line 198
vehicle routing problem (VRP) and vehicle-routing problem with time windows (VRPTW), lines 203-204
(…. just some lacks in the body of the text)
Referring to Figure nr. 1 “five problem families” in line 138. is an arbitrary statement to call those groups as “problems families”, please justify the statement about theese topics.
Figure nr. 3 Eve thought I understood the intention of the authors the figure itself do not fully present the topic itself, as mentioned try to offer to th reader some information on vehicle route problem by adding a paragraph ad a context of it, at least concerning last mile delivery problems.
Please refer to an image like the one highlighted in the present paper (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352340922001135) or to the Solomon benchmark problem test to give a overview to the reader.
Subparagraph 2.4:
- Does the concentric barrier diagram follow the outer laywer- core scheme? Please justify it, and highlight key principles at the basis.
- Please justify the limits of those barriers through enhancing a deeper insight for each point, and offer a statement ad some reference for all items
- Figure nr. 4 Please provide a linear and less sophisticated figure, no colors are necessary to fill the area,
- 4.2. Data availability & scale, 2.4.3. Energy and 2.4.4. Organizational readiness consumption are not mentioned in the concentric barrier diagram.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsI appreciate that the authors addressed my previous comments. My only new concern about this revision is that Section 2 (Background) now accounts for a significant portion of the manuscript, which made the overall article unbalanced. I suggest that the authors (at least try to) further condense this section. I also suggest merging Section 2.5 into Section 5.
Author Response
Comment 1: I suggest that the authors (at least try to) further condense this section.
Response 1: Thank you for this suggestion. We have tried as much as possible to further condense the Background section.
Comment 2: I also suggest merging Section 2.5 into Section 5.
Response 2: Thank you for this suggestion. We have implemented this suggestion, merging Section 2.5 into Section 5. In the manuscript, you will see that Section 2.5 now became Section 5.1
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe author revised the paper appropriately, so it is suitable for acceptance.
Author Response
Comment 1: The author revised the paper appropriately, so it is suitable for acceptance.
Response 1: Thank you for all your prior comments which helped us improve our manuscript.
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThank you so much for your intense work of review; it is well appreciated.
Please keep attention to the indentation of some paragraphs.
The caption of Figure 3 should be adjusted. Please focus also on some missing lines and typos, as in tables 2, 3, and 4.
Author Response
Comment 1: Please keep attention to the indentation of some paragraphs.
Response 1: Thank you for identifying this. Our manuscript has been created using MDPI's latex template and all indentation is automatically applied. There are some paragraphs that are parts of lists in section 2.2 that are not further indented; however, this is correct formatting as they are lists. We believe our formatting is correct as per the MDPI latex template.
Comment 2: The caption of Figure 3 should be adjusted. Please focus also on some missing lines and typos, as in tables 2, 3, and 4.
Response 2: Thank you for identifying this. After seeking advice with the MDPI latex in their example, we noticed that it is possible to have a full-width table which allows more space and prevents the awkward positioning of spacing. We have now adjusted the formatting of the tables and we believe it is much better.
