Web-services-based spatial decision support system to facilitate nuclear waste siting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The availability of spatial web services enables data sharing among managers, decision and policy makers and other stakeholders in much simpler ways than before and subsequently has created completely new opportunities in the process of spatial decision making. Though generally designed for a certain problem domain, web-services-based spatial decision support systems (WSDSS) can provide a flexible problem-solving environment to explore the decision problem, understand and refine problem definition, and generate and evaluate multiple alternatives for decision. This paper presents a new framework for the development of a web-services-based spatial decision support system. The WSDSS is comprised of distributed web services that either have their own functions or provide different geospatial data and may reside in different computers and locations. WSDSS includes six key components, namely: database management system, catalog, analysis functions and models, GIS viewers and editors, report generators, and graphical user interfaces. In this study, the architecture of a web-services-based spatial decision support system to facilitate nuclear waste siting is described as an example. The theoretical, conceptual and methodological challenges and issues associated with developing web services-based spatial decision support system are described.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".