MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1997702126 · doi:10.1080/15567249.2010.483448

Interval Fuzzy Robust Dynamic Programming for Nonrenewable Energy Resources Management with Chance Constraints

2013· article· en· W1997702126 on OpenAlex
X.H. Nie, Guohe Huang, Yongping Li, Lei Liu

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy Sources Part B Economics Planning and Policy · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater resources management and optimization
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityUniversity of Regina
FundersU.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
KeywordsInterval (graph theory)Mathematical optimizationComputer scienceFuzzy logicReliability (semiconductor)Constraint (computer-aided design)Stochastic programmingContext (archaeology)Interval arithmeticDynamic programmingNon-renewable resourceOperations researchReliability engineeringRisk analysis (engineering)Renewable energyEngineeringMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study introduces a chance constrained interval fuzzy robust dynamic programming (CCIFRDP) approach, which can effectively reflect uncertain, dynamic and interactive features of energy-environmental management systems, as well as assist in examining the reliability of satisfying (or risk of violating) system constraints under uncertainty. Within a multi-stage context, the CCIFRDP can facilitate dynamic analysis for capacity-expansion planning under different constraint-violation risk levels. The developed method has been applied to the planning for facility expansion and energy-flow allocation within a regional energy-environment system. The results indicate that reasonable solutions for both binary and continuous variables have been generated under different levels of constraint-violation risk. The obtained interval solutions are useful in generating decision alternatives, which represent various options for environmental-economic tradeoffs. The results can be used to generate decision alternatives and help managers to identify desired energy policies under various environmental, economic, and system-reliability conditions.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.492
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.183 · 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