Urban search and rescue (USAR) simulation in earthquake environments using queuing theory: estimating the appropriate number of rescue teams
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The duration of an urban search and rescue (USAR) operation directly depends on the number of rescue teams involved. The purpose of this paper is to simplify the earthquake environment and determine the initial number of rescuers in earthquake emergencies in USAR operation. Design/methodology/approach In the proposed methodology, four primary steps were considered: evaluation of buildings damage and the number of injured people by exerting geospatial information system (GIS) analyses; determining service time by means of task allocation; designing the simulation model (queuing theory); and calculation of survival rate and comparison with the time of rescue operations. Findings The calculation of buildings damage for an earthquake with 6.6 Richter in Tehran’s District One indicated that 18% of buildings are subjected to the high damage risk. The number of injured people calculated was 28,856. According to the calculated survival rate, rescue operations in the region must be completed within 22.33 h to save 75% of the casualties. Finally, the design of the queue model indicated that at least 2,300 rescue teams were required to provide the calculated survival rate. Originality/value The originality of this paper is an innovative approach for determining an appropriate number of rescue teams by considering the queuing theory. The results showed that the integration of GIS and the simulation of queuing theory could be a helpful tool in natural disaster management, especially in terms of rapid vulnerability assessment in urban districts, the adequacy and appropriateness of the emergency services.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 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".