MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2020346614 · doi:10.1080/00207543.2015.1037405

A generic and flexible simulation-based analysis tool for EMS management

2015· article· en· W2020346614 on OpenAlexafffund
Yannick Kergosien, Válerie Bélanger, P. Soriano, Megs S. Gendreau, Ángel Ruiz

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Production Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFacility Location and Emergency Management
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalPolytechnique MontréalUniversité de MontréalTransport CanadaHEC Montréal
FundersFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les Technologies
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Emergency medical servicesTask (project management)Computer scienceDiscrete event simulationEvent (particle physics)Medical emergencyOperations researchOperations managementEngineeringSimulationMedicineSystems engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Emergency medical services (EMS) are dedicated to provide urgent medical care to any person requiring it and to ensure their transport to a hospital or care facility, if required. Moreover, in many contexts, EMS also have to provide transportation services for patients need to go from one hospital to another or between their home and the hospital. For such organisations, efficient strategies for managing the ambulance fleet at their disposal have to be selected, but the highly random and dynamic nature of the system under study makes this a challenging task. Most of the published studies which have considered these issues have done it focusing on a specific EMS context, one city or one territory for instance. However, it is possible to identify several common characteristics and processes from one EMS context to another. This is the purpose of the generic discrete event simulation-based analysis tool proposed here, which can be adapted to a wide range of EMS contexts. In particular, it explicitly considers the two types of tasks that can compose the mission of an EMS: serving emergency requests and providing transports between care units/hospitals/patients’ homes.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.221
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.199 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations55
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Production ResearchSame topicFacility Location and Emergency ManagementFrench-language works237,207