MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2254722201 · doi:10.1080/15732479.2015.1076485

Maintenance planning using continuous-state partially observable Markov decision processes and non-linear action models

2015· article· en· W2254722201 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueStructure and Infrastructure Engineering · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicConcrete Corrosion and Durability
Canadian institutionsCentre de Géomatique du Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPartially observable Markov decision processMarkov decision processComputer scienceObservableMathematical optimizationAction (physics)State (computer science)Markov processMarkov chainOperations researchMarkov modelMathematicsMachine learningAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The signs of deterioration in worldwide infrastructure and the associated socio-economic and environmental losses call for sustainable resource management and policy-making. To this end, this work presents an enhanced variant of partially observable Markov decision processes (POMDPs) for the life cycle assessment and maintenance planning of infrastructure. POMDPs comprise a method, commonly employed in the field of robotics, for decision-making on the basis of uncertain observations. In the work presented herein, a continuous-state POMDP formulation is presented which is adapted to the problem of decision-making for optimal management of civil structures. The aforementioned problem may comprise non-linear and non-deterministic action and observation models. The continuous-state POMDP is herein coupled with a normalised unscented transform (NUT) in order to deliver a framework able to tackle non-linearities that likely characterise action models. The capabilities of this enhanced framework and its applicability to the maintenance planning problem are presented via two applications. In a first illustrative example, the use of the NUT is demonstrated within the framework of the value iteration algorithm. Next, the proposed continuous-state framework is compared against a discrete-state formulation for implementation on a life cycle assessment problem.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.183
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.218 · 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