MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3125300211

Optimal Ambulance Location with Random Delays and Travel Times

2007· article· en· W3125300211 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ármann Ingólfsson, Susan Budge, Erhan Erkut

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFacility Location and Emergency Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTravel timeRandomnessAmbulance serviceComputer scienceService (business)Location modelFacility location problemOperations researchTransport engineeringEngineeringStatisticsMathematicsBusiness
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe an ambulance location optimization model that minimizes the number of ambulances needed to provide a specified service level. The model measures service level as the fraction of calls reached within a given time standard and considers response time to be composed of a random delay (prior to travel to the scene) plus a random travel time. In addition to modeling the uncertainty in the delay and in the travel time, we incorporate uncertainty in the ambulance availability in determining the response time. Models that do not account for the uncertainty in all three of these components may overestimate the possible service level for a given number of ambulances and underestimate the number of ambulances needed to provide a specified service level. By explicitly modeling the randomness in the ambulance availability and in the delays and the travel times, we arrive at a more realistic ambulance location model. Our model is tractable enough to be solved with general-purpose optimization solvers for cities with populations around one Million. We illustrate the use of the model using actual data from Edmonton.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.081

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations3
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicFacility Location and Emergency ManagementFrench-language works237,207