Airport apron capacity: estimation, representation, and flexibility
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 This paper addresses some important issues related to airport apron capacity planning and management. An overview of existing apron models for supporting planning studies and for optimizing available resources utilization is given, with an emphasis on analytical models for apron capacity estimation. Constraints on apron usage, physical and operational with respect to different users, are discussed in detail, together with their impact on apron capacity. Simple extension of existing apron capacity estimation models is suggested accounting for constraints both on aircraft types and dominant users. Further on, instead of expressing apron capacity through a single number, an apron capacity envelope is used to illustrate capacity changes, that is, an apron's ability to accept various mixes of dominant users in demand. The apron capacity envelope provides information on capacity for one apron configuration (with respect to stand size and policy of usage) and a given fleet mix, for different shares of dominant users in demand. Finally, apron capacity flexibility is discussed with respect to its role in apron capacity planning and management. It is suggested how to express and interpret apron capacity flexibility. Copyright © 2013 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 | 0.001 |
| 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