MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Reinforcement Learning Using Monte Carlo Policy Estimation for Disaster Mitigation

2014· book-chapter· en· W126702457 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammed Khouj, Sarbjit Sarkaria, César López, José R. Martí

Bibliographic record

VenueLecture notes in computer science · 2014
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Resilience and Vulnerability Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceReinforcement learningNoveltyExploitInterdependenceRisk analysis (engineering)Monte Carlo methodCritical infrastructureOperations researchArtificial intelligenceComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Urban communities rely heavily on the system of interconnected critical infrastructures. The interdependencies in these complex systems give rise to vulnerabilities that must be considered in disaster mitigation planning. Only then will it be possible to address and mitigate major critical infrastructure disruptions in a timely manner. This paper describes an intelligent decision making system that optimizes the allocation of resources following an infrastructure disruption. The novelty of the approach arises from the application of Monte Carlo estimation for policy evaluation in reinforcement learning to draw on experiential knowledge gained from a massive number of simulations. This method enables a learning agent to explore and exploit the available trajectories, which lead to an optimum goal in a reasonable amount of time. The specific goal of the case study described in this paper is to maximize the number of patients discharged from two hospitals in the aftermath of an infrastructure disruption by intelligently utilizing the available resources. The results demonstrate that a learning agent, through interactions with an environment of simulated catastrophic scenarios, is capable of making informed decisions in a timely manner.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.239 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLecture notes in computer scienceSame topicInfrastructure Resilience and Vulnerability AnalysisFrench-language works237,207