MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2898365018 · doi:10.1109/tits.2018.2874235

A Hierarchical Heuristic Approach for Solving Air Traffic Scheduling and Routing Problem With a Novel Air Traffic Model

2018· article· en· W2898365018 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Yicheng Zhang, Rong Su, Gammana Guruge Nadeesha Sandamali, Yi Zhang, Christos G. Cassandras, Lihua Xie

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAir Traffic Management and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Science and Technology of ChinaNanyang Technological UniversityUniversity of TorontoEconomic Development Board - Singapore
KeywordsScheduling (production processes)HeuristicAir traffic controlComputer scienceJob shop schedulingRouting (electronic design automation)Mathematical optimizationOperations researchEngineeringComputer networkArtificial intelligenceMathematicsAerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Efficient flight routing and scheduling play an important role in air traffic flow management, which aims to maximize the utilization of airport and enroute capacities to ensure safety and efficiency of air transportation. In this paper, we first propose a novel discrete-time flow dynamic model for an air traffic network, consisting of airports, waypoints, and air links, upon which we formulate an air flow routing and scheduling problem as an integer linear programming problem. Considering the NP-hard nature of the problem, we present a novel hierarchical flow routing and scheduling approach, where the hierarchical architecture is derived naturally from the network containment relationship, and computation is carried out in a bottom-up manner, which relies on an incremental strategy. On the resulting flow routes and schedules, a heuristic algorithm is carried out to determine flight plans for individual aircrafts. The effectiveness of the proposed hierarchical approach is illustrated by air traffic data in four flight information regions in the association of Southeast Asian nations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations25
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation SystemsSame topicAir Traffic Management and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207