Bilevel Fuzzy Chance Constrained Hospital Outpatient Appointment Scheduling Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hospital outpatient departments operate by selling fixed period appointments for different treatments. The challenge being faced is to improve profit by determining the mix of full time and part time doctors and allocating appointments (which involves scheduling a combination of doctors, patients, and treatments to a time period in a department) optimally. In this paper, a bilevel fuzzy chance constrained model is developed to solve the hospital outpatient appointment scheduling problem based on revenue management. In the model, the hospital, the leader in the hierarchy, decides the mix of the hired full time and part time doctors to maximize the total profit; each department, the follower in the hierarchy, makes the decision of the appointment scheduling to maximize its own profit while simultaneously minimizing surplus capacity. Doctor wage and demand are considered as fuzzy variables to better describe the real-life situation. Then we use chance operator to handle the model with fuzzy parameters and equivalently transform the appointment scheduling model into a crisp model. Moreover, interactive algorithm based on satisfaction is employed to convert the bilevel programming into a single level programming, in order to make it solvable. Finally, the numerical experiments were executed to demonstrate the efficiency and effectiveness of the proposed approaches.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".