MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3107559526 · doi:10.1155/2020/8835201

A Tabu Search-Based Algorithm for Airport Gate Assignment: A Case Study in Kunming, China

2020· article· en· W3107559526 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jun Bi, Zhen Wu, Lei Wang, Dongfan Xie, Xiaomei Zhao

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAir Traffic Management and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTabu searchInternational airportMathematical optimizationComputer scienceScheduling (production processes)Guided Local SearchProcess (computing)Operations researchEngineeringTransport engineeringAlgorithmMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An airport gate is the core resource of an airport operation, which is an important place for passengers to get on and off the aircraft and for maintaining aircraft. It is the prerequisite for other related dispatch. Effective and reasonable allocation of gates can reduce airport operating costs and increase passenger satisfaction. Therefore, an airport gate assignment problem (AGAP) needs to be urgently solved in the actual operation of the airport. In this paper, considering the actual operation of the airport, we formulate an integer programming model for AGAP by considering multiple constraints. The model aims to maximize the number of passengers on flights parked at the gate. A tabu search-based algorithm is designed to solve the problem. In the process of algorithm design, an effective initial solution is obtained. A unique neighborhood structure and search strategy for tabu search are designed. The algorithm can adapt to the dynamic scheduling of airports. Finally, tests are performed using actual airport data selected from Kunming Changshui International Airport in China. The experimental results indicate that the proposed method can enhance the local search ability and global search ability and get satisfactory results in a limited time. These results provide an effective support for the actual gate assignment in airport 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)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.086
Threshold uncertainty score0.171

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations13
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicAir Traffic Management and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207