MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4237045795 · doi:10.1109/wsc.2008.4736343

Multi-Agent Resource Allocation (MARA) for modeling construction processes

2008· article· en· W4237045795 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venue2008 Winter Simulation Conference · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicScheduling and Optimization Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceAdaptabilityScheduling (production processes)ProcurementScheduleField (mathematics)Resource allocationSample (material)Resource (disambiguation)Operations researchShared resourceSystems engineeringDistributed computingEngineeringOperations management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multi-Agent Resource Allocation (MARA) is a field developing solutions to the problem of distributing a number of resources amongst multiple agents. This field has inter-disciplinary characteristics and relates to a wide range of applications, such as industrial procurement, scheduling and network routing. Many construction operations involve entities sharing and competing for limited resources. The decision to allocate these resources to entities usually has a significant impact on the schedule and cost of these operations. The dynamic and continuously changing nature of construction operations justifies the need for decision support tools with high adaptability and handling of uncertainty which is featured by MARA. This paper presents the main elements and techniques in MARA and discusses a sample case applying these techniques for the modeling of industrial construction assembly processes, also presents the conceptual model of the sample case and a prototype implementation of that model using Repast multi-agent simulation package.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.789
Threshold uncertainty score0.623

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.209 · 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