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 OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohammad Rezaei-Malek, Reza Tavakkoli‐Moghaddam

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.042
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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations71
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUncertain Supply Chain ManagementSame topicFacility Location and Emergency ManagementFrench-language works237,207