MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2028696978 · doi:10.1002/atr.137

IF‐EM: An interval‐parameter fuzzy linear programming model for environment‐oriented evacuation planning under uncertainty

2010· article· en· W2028696978 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Qian Tan, Guohe Huang, Chaozhong Wu, Yanpeng Cai

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEvacuation and Crowd Dynamics
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterval (graph theory)Robustness (evolution)Mathematical optimizationFuzzy logicComputer scienceOperations researchCompromiseReliability (semiconductor)Linear programmingEngineeringMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The processes and factors involved in evacuation activities are associated with a variety of uncertainties, posing major challenges to evacuation planners. This study represents an attempt to employ inexact optimization techniques for addressing uncertainties in evacuation practices. In this study, an interval‐parameter fuzzy evacuation management (IF‐EM) model is developed for supporting environment‐oriented evacuation management under uncertainty. Through IF‐EM, uncertainties in the model's stipulations and coefficients which are expressed as fuzzy sets and interval numbers can be directly communicated into the optimization process, greatly enhancing the robustness of the optimization system. The model is then applied to a case study and solved through a two‐step interactive algorithm. A number of evacuation schemes can be generated by adjusting decision variables within their solution intervals according to projected planning conditions, reflecting various decision policies and a compromise between system optimality and stability. The relationships among vehicle allocation pattern, evacuation time, system satisfaction level, and system reliability level can be effectively reflected, facilitating more in‐depth analyses of interactions among system efficiency, environmental protection, and economic cost. Results from the case study suggest that the proposed IF‐EM model is applicable to practical evacuation problems that are associated with uncertainties and complexities. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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 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 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.332
Threshold uncertainty score0.584

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations40
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicEvacuation and Crowd DynamicsFrench-language works237,207