Planning Emergency Shelters for Urban Disaster Resilience: An Integrated Location-Allocation Modeling Approach
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
In recent years, extreme natural hazards threaten cities more than ever due to contemporary society’s high vulnerability in cities. Hence, local governments need to implement risk mitigation and disaster operation management to enhance disaster resilience in cities. Transforming existing open spaces within cities into emergency shelters is an effective method of providing essential life support and an agent of recovery in the wake of disasters. Emergency shelters planning must identify suitable locations for shelters and reasonably allocate evacuees to those shelters. In this paper, we first consider both the buildings’ post-disaster condition and the human choice factor that affect evacuees’ decision, and propose a forecasting method to estimate the time-varying shelter demand. Then we formulate an integrated location-allocation model that is used sequentially: an emergency shelter location model to satisfy the time-varying shelter demand in a given urban area with a goal of minimizing the total setup cost of locating the shelters and an allocation model that allocates the evacuees to shelters with a goal of minimizing their total evacuation distance. We also develop an efficient algorithm to solve the model. Finally, we propose an emergency shelters planning based on a case study of Shanghai, China.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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