Airport gate reassignments considering deterministic and stochastic flight departure/arrival times
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
SUMMARY It is often the case in actual airport operations that flight departure/arrival information will vary with time. In practice, flight departure/arrival times closer to the time when the airport authority starts to plan the reassignments tend to be more certain; those further away tend to be more stochastic. These two types of flights can be called deterministic flights and stochastic flights , respectively. A deterministic flight has a certain departure/arrival time; while a stochastic flight will have a variety of stochastic departure/arrival times. In this study the aim is to develop a gate reassignment model (GRM) designed to consider both deterministic and stochastic flight departure/arrival times. A 0–1 integer programming technique is applied to formulate the GRM. In practice gate reassignments need to be handled repeatedly, so to make this possible the GRM is applied to a dynamic gate reassignment framework (DGRF). The theoretical effectiveness of the GRM applied to the DGRF is evaluated by the development of a lower bound solution. Numerical tests, related to the operations of an international Taiwan airport, show that the proposed GRM and DGRF perform well. 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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it