Robustness Analysis of Air Route Network Based on Topology Potential and Relative Entropy Methods
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Air route network (ARN) is the important carrier of air transport, and its robustness has important influence on the safety and stability of air transport. To analyze the robustness of ARN, in this paper, a topology potential relative entropy (TPRE) model is proposed, based on topology potential (TP) and relative entropy (RE) methods. Firstly, the TPRE model is established as the theoretical basis for the research. Secondly, an air route reduction network (ARRN) model is constructed according to real Chinese ARN. Besides, the basic topology features of ARRN are given by complex network theory. To prove the applicability, objectivity, and accuracy of the proposed method, attack strategies including random, degree, betweenness, closeness, eigenvector, and Bonacich are used to attack ARRN. Eventually, the performance of ARRN robustness is analyzed by network efficiency, size of giant component, and the proposed TPRE model. This conclusion has practical significance for optimizing ARN structure and improving airspace efficiency.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".