MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2955720331 · doi:10.1016/j.ins.2019.07.014

Facing robustness as a multi-objective problem: A bi-objective shortest path problem in smart regions

2019· article· en· W2955720331 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Christian Cintrano, Francisco Chicano, Enrique Alba

Bibliographic record

VenueInformation Sciences · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTransportation Planning and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinisterio de Economía y CompetitividadFPInnovations
KeywordsRobustness (evolution)Computer scienceShortest path problemMathematical optimizationRobust optimizationOptimization problemAlgorithmMathematicsTheoretical computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The goal in Robust Optimization is to optimize not only the quality of the solutions but also the variation of this quality with the uncertain parameters of the optimization problem . We propose a robust model for the bi-objective shortest path problem applied in a smart mobility context: Finding routes for cars in a city to minimize travel time and gas emissions. Our proposal treats robustness from a multi-objective point of view. We model the parameters that define each instance as random variables , described through their mean and variance. In this way, we can obtain efficient solutions that are also less sensitive to changes in the environment. We run different types of algorithms in multiple instances to solve this problem so that we obtain a global view of the behavior of different techniques. All experimentation uses a scenario based on real data : The province of Malaga, Spain. This realistic settlement for our study allows us to test the applicability of our model in final systems for the citizens. The results clearly state the interest of our proposal for tackling robustness and represents a new state-of-the-art in smart mobility, an always appealing feature of works, that could lead to an industrial prototype.

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 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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.319
Threshold uncertainty score0.937

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.004
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations13
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInformation SciencesSame topicTransportation Planning and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207