GIS and Intelligent Agents for Multiobjective Natural Resource Allocation: A Reinforcement Learning Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract An important component of natural resource management is determining how to allocate resources within a landscape to different stakeholders in a manner that satisfies multiple objectives. Developing decision making tools for assisting natural resource allocation is a challenging endeavor as stakeholders' objectives typically exist at varying spatial scales, their actions are defined by the spatial constraints in which they operate, and the spatial distribution of resources can be altered due to system disturbances. The nature of such challenges suggests the need for a geographic approach that can investigate these spatial complexities in order to generate a suitable set of solutions. The objective of this study is to develop and evaluate an Intelligent Agent Model for multiobjective natural resource allocation. The model integrates agent‐based modeling in a GIS environment with reinforcement learning – a heuristic method for generating, evaluating, and improving multiobjective decision making solutions. The model is implemented by simulating a forest management scenario in which agents that represent forest companies learn how to harvest trees in a manner that maximizes economic return while minimizing the adverse ecological impact to the surrounding landscape. In addition, the model simulates forest disturbances of varying frequencies and intensities to determine how disturbance events affect the decision‐making ability of agents. The model is validated to demonstrate that it can provide practical solutions to natural resource decision making.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".