A fuzzy-stochastic robust programming model for regional air quality management under uncertainty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper proposes a hybrid fuzzy-stochastic robust programming (FSRP) method and applies it to a case study of regional air quality management. As an extension of the existing fuzzy-robust programming and chance-constrained programming methods, FSRP can explicitly address complexities and uncertainties without unrealistic simplifications. Parameters in the FSRP model can be expressed as PDFs and/or membership functions, such that robustness of the optimization process can be enhanced. In its solution process, the FSRP model is converted to a deterministic version through transforming m imprecise constraints into 2 km precise inclusive constraints that correspond to k f -cut levels (under each given significance level). Results of the case study indicate that FSRP is applicable to problems that involve a variety of uncertainties. Air pollution control invariably involves a number of processes with socio-economic and environmental implications. These processes are associated with extensive uncertainties due to their complex, interactive, dynamic, and multiobjective features. Through the FSRP modeling study, useful solutions for planning regional air quality management practices have been generated. They reflect complex trade-offs between environmental and economic considerations. Willingness to pay higher operating costs will guarantee meeting environmental objectives; however, a desire to reduce the costs will run the risk of potentially violating the emission and/or ambient-air-quality standards.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".