Reinforcement Learning Using Monte Carlo Policy Estimation for Disaster Mitigation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".