Air holding problem solving with reinforcement learning to reduce airspace congestion
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 The Air Holding Problem Module is proposed as a decision support system to help air traffic controllers in their daily air traffic flow management. This system is developed using an Artificial Intelligence technique known as multiagent systems to organize and optimize the solutions for controllers to handle traffic flow in Brazilian airspace. In this research, the air holding problem is modeled with reinforcement learning, and a solution is proposed and applied in two case studies of the Brazilian airspace. The system can suggest more precise and realistic actions based upon past situations and knowledge of the professionals and forecast the impact of restrictive measures at the local and/or overall level. The first case study shows performance improvements in traffic flows between 8 and 47% at the local level up to 49% at the overall level. In the second case study, performance improvements were between 15 and 57% at the local level and between 41 and 48% at the overall level. Copyright © 2014 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