MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3110151778 · doi:10.1155/2020/3976910

Simulation Study on Cascading Failure of Multimodal Transport Network

2020· article· en· W3110151778 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jingni Guo, Junxiang Xu, Zhenggang He, Wei Liao

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicComplex Network Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCascading failureScalabilityComputer scienceNode (physics)Transport networkFlow networkMultimodal transportComputer networkDistributed computingEngineeringTransport engineeringMathematical optimizationMathematicsElectric power system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cascading failure in multimodal transport network may cause huge economic loss and social impact, which has gradually attracted public attention. In view of the coupling effect of nodes in multimodal transport network and the higher complexity of cascading failure process, the concepts of node correlation degree and node cooperation degree are proposed to characterize the characteristics of the network, and a logit model is introduced to calculate the initial load of nodes. In the case of ignoring network interruption, we propose two load redistribution methods: local allocation and global-local allocation. Taking the multimodal transport network in Sichuan–Tibet region of China as an example, the cascading failure effect of multimodal transport network in Sichuan–Tibet region is quantified by sensitivity analysis. The results show that when the load of the multimodal transport network in Sichuan–Tibet region exceeds the maximum capacity but does not exceed 150%∼170% of the network capacity, the network can still operate normally. In addition, the nodes in the multimodal transport network should have 0.3∼0.5 scalable space. In the cascading failure control method, load redistribution based on global-local allocation can minimize the impact of node overload.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.863
Threshold uncertainty score0.515

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations11
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicComplex Network Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207