Performance Assessment Model for Municipal Solid Waste Management systems: Development and Implementation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Most of the municipalities in the Gulf region are facing performance related issues in their municipal solid waste management (MSWM) systems. They lack to possess a deliberate inter-municipality benchmarking processes. Instead of identifying the performance gaps for their key components (e.g., personnel productivity, operational reliability, etc.) and adopt proactive measures, the municipalities primarily rely on an efficient emergency response. A novel hierarchical modeling framework, based on deductive reasoning, is developed for performance assessment of MSWM systems. Fuzzy rule based modeling using Simulink-MATLAB was used for performance inferencing at different levels, i.e., component, sub-components, etc. The model is capable of handling the inherent uncertainties due to limited data and imprecise knowledge base. The model’s outcomes can exclusively assist the managers working at different levels of organizational hierarchy for effective decision-making. Performance of the key component, assists the senior management to assess the overall compliance level of performance objectives. Subsequently, operation management can hone in the sub-components to acquire useful information for intra-municipality performance management. While, individual indicators are useful for inter-municipality benchmarking. The model has been implemented on two municipalities operating in Qassim Region, Saudi Arabia. The results demonstrate the model’s pragmatism for continuous performance improvement of MSWM systems in the country and elsewhere.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".