MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3098735321 · doi:10.1155/2020/6527924

The Electric Riverboat Charging Station Location Problem

2020· article· en· W3098735321 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Daniel Villa, Alejandro Montoya, Aura Maria Herrera

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Vehicles and Infrastructure
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversidad EAFITDepartamento Administrativo de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación (COLCIENCIAS)
KeywordsCharging stationComputer scienceGridBattery (electricity)Nonlinear programmingMathematical optimizationLinear programmingInteger programmingSet (abstract data type)Electric vehiclePhotovoltaic systemFunction (biology)Nonlinear systemElectrical engineeringEngineeringMathematicsAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nowadays, the electric mobility is mainly focused on urban areas. However, the use of Photovoltaic-assisted Charging Stations (PVCSs) can contribute to implement the electric mobility in rural areas disconnected from the national grid. Inspired by the new river operations with an Electric Boat (EB), we introduce a new location problem named the Electric Riverboat Charging Station Location Problem (ERCSLP). This problem estimates the necessary infrastructure for an EB to be able to perform a round trip. In this case, we decide the location of the PVCSs and the size of the EB battery aiming to minimize the sum of the PVCS and the EB battery costs. In this problem, we include the nonlinear behavior of the charging function and the variation of the solar radiation. For solving this problem, we propose a Mixed-Integer Linear Programming (MILP) formulation. For testing this MILP formulation, we build a set of instances based on real river transport operations that have the potential to migrate to the electric mobility. In our computational experiments, we show that our MILP formulation can find the optimal solution of the instances. Finally, we perform a sensitivity analysis and an economic viability analysis of the electric mobility in these operations.

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)0.002
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.187 · 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

Citations12
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicElectric Vehicles and InfrastructureFrench-language works237,207