Multi–stage process for chemotherapy scheduling and effective capacity determination
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A novel solution approach is developed for the scheduling of chemotherapy sessions at cancer treatment centers. The problem is divided into two subproblems determining the day (interday scheduling) and the time slots (intraday scheduling), respectively. The interday subproblem is solved by a model that allows for effective treatment center capacity choices while the intraday subproblem is addressed using two optimization models. New patient arrivals and treatment protocols specifying the latest starting date and session spacing are sources of uncertainty. Unlike other existing approaches, the proposed method incorporates the concept of effective treatment capacity which facilitates the interaction between the interday and intraday subproblems allowing them to be solved sequentially and iteratively to thus achieve much more resource‐efficient solutions. A case study using real data from a Chilean cancer center to conduct comparative simulations of its manual scheduling methods and the proposed methodology found that the latter almost always performed better, often significantly so, on makespan, resource utilization, overtime, and patient diversion metrics.
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.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 it