MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2057619336 · doi:10.3138/infor.50.1.001

Déploiement et Redéploiement des Véhicules Ambulanciers dans la Gestion d'un Service Préhospitalier d'Urgence

2012· article· fr· W2057619336 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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueINFOR Information Systems and Operational Research · 2012
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFacility Location and Emergency Management
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalHEC Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhysicsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RésuméCet article propose une revue des différents travaux publiés en lien avec le déploiement et le redéploiement des véhicules ambulanciers. Le problème de déploiement consiste à déterminer les différents points d'attente à utiliser pour la localisation des véhicules entre deux affectations. De son côté, le problème de redéploiement consiste plutôt à relocaliser les véhicules disponibles parmi les différents points d'attente potentiels de façon à assurer, en tout temps, une couverture adéquate de la population. Cet article présente les trois principales approches considérées pour modéliser le problème de déploiement, soit la programmation mathématique, la simulation et la théorie des files d'attente, et recense les méthodes développées afin de le résoudre. Il propose également une description des modèles conçus pour le redéploiement des véhicules ambulanciers. Enfin, il discute des règles d'affectation des véhicules aux appels de détresse, puis de différentes avenues de recherche potentielles.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScholarly communication
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.899
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.015
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.250 · 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