MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2562354060 · doi:10.3808/jei.201500293

MCFP: A Monte Carlo Simulation-based Fuzzy Programming Approach for Optimization under Dual Uncertainties of Possibility and Continuous Probability

2016· article· en· W2562354060 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

VenueJournal of Environmental Informatics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater resources management and optimization
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsFuzzy logicMonte Carlo methodDual (grammatical number)Computer scienceMathematical optimizationStochastic programmingOperations researchRange (aeronautics)Reliability (semiconductor)Process (computing)Reliability engineeringEngineeringMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The efficiency and confidence of decision making much rely on accurate information and objective judgement, however, which are usually compromised by uncertainties existing in the system. Although in many studies uncertainties are reflected during optimization processes, few models considered the dual uncertainties of possibility and continuous probability. This study proposed a Monte Carlo simulation-based fuzzy programming (MCFP) approach to handle such dual uncertainties. The developed approach was tested by a municipal solid waste management (MSW) problem to demonstrate its feasibility and efficiency. The results indicated that the proposed approach could obtain a reliable solution and adequately support the decision making process in MSW management. It is significantly advantageous in handling the coexistence of various fuzzy sets and complex probability distributions when compared to the conventional fuzzy stochastic programming approaches. Furthermore, three levels of the optimal results to help decision makers effectively manage the composting facility: the entire distributions for general policy makers in long term policy making and trade-off, risk and reliability analyses of the system; the range of most frequent occurrences for project/plant managers in a medium arrangement; and the expected values for the plant operators for short term operating and adjusting the facility to minimize the system cost. Such different levels of decision supports could make the MCFP approach highly feasible, flexible and adaptable in real-work applications.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.435
Threshold uncertainty score0.314

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.185 · 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