MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1951675612 · doi:10.1002/atr.1228

An optimal aircraft fleet management decision model under uncertainty

2013· article· en· W1951675612 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hooi Ling Khoo, Lay Eng Teoh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicAviation Industry Analysis and Trends
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFleet managementOperations researchRobustness (evolution)Computer scienceProbabilistic logicProfit (economics)Stochastic programmingService (business)Mathematical optimizationEngineeringEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SUMMARY Decision planning for an efficient fleet management is crucial for airlines to ensure a profit while maintaining a good level of service. Fleet management involves acquisition and leasing of aircraft to meet travelers' demand. Accordingly, the methods used in modeling travelers' demand are crucial as they could affect the robustness and accuracy of the solutions. Compared with most of the existing studies that consider deterministic demand, this study proposes a new methodology to find optimal solutions for a fleet management decision model by considering stochastic demand. The proposed methodology comes in threefold. First, a five‐step modeling framework, which is incorporated with a stochastic demand index (SDI), is proposed to capture the occurrence of uncertain events that could affect the travelers' demand. Second, a probabilistic dynamic programming model is developed to optimize the fleet management model. Third, a probable phenomenon indicator is defined to capture the targeted level of service that could be achieved satisfactorily by the airlines under uncertainty. An illustrative case study is presented to evaluate the applicability of the proposed methodology. The results show that it is viable to provide optimal solutions for the aircraft fleet management model. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.787
Threshold uncertainty score0.580

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations26
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicAviation Industry Analysis and TrendsFrench-language works237,207