Dynamic waste management (DWM): Towards an evolutionary decision-making approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To guarantee sustainable and dynamic waste management, the dynamic waste management approach (DWM) suggests an evolutionary new approach that maintains a constant flow towards the most favourable waste treatment processes (facilities) within a system. To that end, DWM is based on the law of conservation of energy, which allows the balancing of a network, while considering the constraints of incoming (h1 ) and outgoing (h2 ) loads, as well as the distribution network (ΔH) characteristics. The developed approach lies on the identification of the prioritization index (PI) for waste generators (analogy to h1 ), a global allocation index for each of the treatment processes (analogy to h2 ) and the linear index load loss (ΔH) associated with waste transport. To demonstrate the scope of DWM, we outline this approach, and then present an example of its application. The case study shows that the variable monthly waste from the three considered sources is dynamically distributed in priority to the more favourable processes. Moreover, the reserve (stock) helps temporarily store waste in order to ease the global load of the network and favour a constant feeding of the treatment processes. The DWM approach serves as a decision-making tool by evaluating new waste treatment processes, as well as their location and new means of transport for waste.
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 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 | 0.010 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".