Inexact Two-Stage Stochastic Programming for Water Resources Allocation under Considering Demand Uncertainties and Response—A Case Study of Tianjin, China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, an inexact two-stage stochastic programming model was developed for supporting regional water resource allocation management under uncertainties. The proposed model is an integrated framework of interval parameter programming and two-stage stochastic programming, which can tackle uncertain parameters expressed as interval values with probability distribution information. The proposed model was successfully applied to a typical heavy industrial city suffering water shortage in the east of China, Tianjin. The uncertainties of future water demand were taken into account through generating a set of representative scenarios. The results indicated that different scenarios would affect the water distribution patterns, water shortages, total benefits and system cost. The results revealed that the transferred water from Luan River and Changjiang River would still be the main water resource for each water user. Besides, nearly all water demand in planning horizon would be guaranteed through the reasonable dispatch except under high demand level scenario, in which a small proportion of water requirement in agricultural, municipal and environmental sectors would not be satisfied. The developed method could be used by environmental managers to identify the optimal water supply plan from multiple sources to different end-user sectors under system uncertainties.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".