MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1997990368 · doi:10.5267/j.uscm.2014.1.002

Robust humanitarian relief logistics network planning

2014· article· en· W1997990368 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueUncertain Supply Chain Management · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFacility Location and Emergency Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitarian LogisticsBusinessOperations managementProcess managementComputer scienceOperations researchEconomicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, death toll of natural and man-made disasters has increased at an appalling rate. Thus, disaster management and especially efficient management of humanitarian relief efforts seem to be essential. This paper presents a bi-objective mixed-integer mathematical model for Humanitarian Relief Logistics (HRL) operations planning, as an important part of the humanitarian relief efforts. This model determines optimal policies including location of warehouses, quantity of emergency relief items that should be held at each warehouse, and distribution plan to provide an emergency response pre-positioning strategy for disasters by considering two objectives. The first one minimizes the average response time and the second one minimizes the total operational cost including the fixed cost of establishing warehouses, the holding cost of unused supplies and the penalty cost of unsatisfied demand. The survival of prepositioned supplies, demand amount and routes condition following an event are considered under uncertainty in the model solved by a robust scenario-based approach. The robust approach is applied to reduce the effects of fluctuations of the uncertain parameters with regards to all the possible future scenarios. The research demonstrates the applicability and usefulness of the proposed model on a case study on earthquake preparation in the Seattle area in USA. In addition, the work applies the Reservation Level Tchebycheff Procedure (RLTP) method to solve the bi-objective model in an interactive way with decision maker. This work provides practitioners, specifically planning teams, with a new approach to assist with disaster preparedness and to improve their logistics decisions.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.960
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.194 · 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