MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2029462000 · doi:10.1080/0305215x.2010.522709

Optimal water resource planning under fixed budget by interval-parameter credibility constrained programming

2011· article· en· W2029462000 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.

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

Bibliographic record

VenueEngineering Optimization · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater resources management and optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCredibilityInterval (graph theory)Resource (disambiguation)Fuzzy logicBudget constraintGoal programmingIrrigationOperations researchWater resourcesCredibility theoryComputer scienceMathematical optimizationMathematicsEconomicsMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this study, an interval credibility constrained programming (ICCP) was developed through introducing the concept of intervals into credibility constrained programming framework. Interval credibility levels can help decision makers to reflect uncertainties of preferences. By ICCP, a water resource planning model with fixed fuzzy budget was developed for supporting the planning of agriculture development and environmental protection. Surface and ground water were planned for regional irrigation in wet and normal seasons. For the interval credibility preference, best and worst cases were analysed. The tradeoff between the budget and the benefit were studied by sensitive analysis. The results showed that the current water resource budget is reasonable. Keywords: water resourcesgroundwaterchance contrained programminginterval programmingcredibility

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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.715
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.178 · 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