The Problem
133 passengers, 52 overhead bins (208 total slots), zero coordination. Watch what happens when bags are placed first-come, first-served with no data and no plan.
0
Gate-checked bags
overflow from full bins
0.0%
Overflow rate
overflow / total bags
0.00
Mean displacement
rows from preferred bin
0
Displaced bags
placed outside preferred bin
Progress: 0 / 133
The Data Structure
Every passenger already declares their bags at check-in. This is the composite data structure that turns that data into a conflict-minimized boarding plan: a segment tree for O(log B) bin queries, a priority queue for boarding order, and a capacity ledger for overflow prediction.
Check-In Counter
Checked in: 0 / 133
Step or play to begin check-in
No segment tree data available. Initialize the simulation to view the tree.
Segment tree over bin capacities: O(log B) queries find the nearest valid bin. Internal nodes store max remaining capacity in subtree.
Priority queue is empty. Check in passengers to populate the queue.
Min-heap priority queue: key = (boardingGroup << 16) + checkinSequence. Boarding group order with FIFO within groups.
Capacity Ledger
0 / 208 slots committed
Capacity ledger tracks committed vs. projected slots. When projectedOverflow first exceeds 0, the airline knows hours before boarding that bins will overflow.
No allocations yet. Check in passengers to see bin assignments.
The Algorithm
Four interval-constrained bin packing strategies, each run 3 times on independently generated 133-passenger manifests. All algorithms within each run process the identical dataset (common random numbers) so differences reflect algorithmic choice alone.
key insight
The check-in allocation algorithm converts an online problem (passengers arrive one at a time with no advance info) into an offline problem (all data known at check-in before boarding begins). This is not standard bin packing: it is Interval-Constrained Bin Packing on a Line (ICBPL), where each bag is restricted to a contiguous subset of bins determined by seat location. The problem is NP-hard (Dawande et al. 2000), but the segment tree makes practical allocation O(N log B), effectively instant for any aircraft. Airlines already have the data. They just process it too late.
The Check-In Notification System
Real-time passenger communication transforms bin allocation from a gate-time scramble into a check-in-time certainty.
Check-In (online)
Bag Declaration
System Allocates Bin Slot
Gate Arrival (bin shown on pass)
Boarding (direct to assigned bin)
Check-in notification
ChaosPlane Airlines
How many carry-on bags?
Selected: 1 bag
Gate display board
Flight UA 1234 — Overhead Bin Status
Enhanced boarding pass
ChaosPlane
UA 1234
Passenger
Jane Smith
Seat
14A
Group
3
Bin
NO BIN INFO
Current boarding passes have no bin information. IATA BCBP standard v7 (2021) has no field for carry-on bin assignment. One additional field eliminates all searching.
key insight
Airlines already send notifications during check-in (seat assignments, upgrade offers, gate changes). Adding bin allocation is zero additional infrastructure -- it is a software update, not a hardware purchase. The $750K-per-aircraft retrofit for larger bins is unnecessary if you allocate existing space intelligently.
The Impact
Industry data and simulation results quantifying the value of algorithmic bin allocation versus the status quo.
$7.27B
Annual U.S. checked bag fees
U.S. DOT Bureau of Transportation Statistics, 2024
68%
Boarding time increase from hand luggage
Schultz 2018
>$50M/yr
Savings from 1-min boarding reduction
Jaehn and Neumann 2015 (per major carrier)
$2M-$10M
Software system development + deployment
vs. $750K-$1M per aircraft hardware retrofit
Before vs. after comparison
Run the simulation to see comparison data
Overflow reduction hierarchy
Average gate-checked bags (lower is better)
Measured from 3 independent runs per algorithm. Reduction percentages are relative to Local First Fit (the online baseline).
Run the simulation to see overflow data
cost-benefit
Even if the software system captures only 30% of the benefit of a hardware upgrade, its ROI is orders of magnitude higher. The two approaches are also complementary: bigger bins increase total capacity, algorithmic allocation reduces waste of existing capacity.