Benders decomposition to accelerate determination of optimal railway intervention programmes
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
An important task of railway asset managers is to develop intervention programmes. These interventions need to be developed considering network-level synergies and constraints, in addition to the condition of the assets and their optimal intervention strategies. Considering these concerns may lead to executing interventions earlier or later than specified in asset intervention strategies to reach optimality. Synergies include the fact that the simultaneous execution of more than one intervention disrupts train movements only once. Constraints include budget limits and not closing parallel lines simultaneously. Although many railway asset managers currently determine intervention programmes in a rather qualitative iterative fashion, there is an increasing interest in exploiting digitalisation to improve the process. This interest has led to a rise in research focused on the development of mixed-integer linear programs to determine optimal programmes more efficiently and effectively. These powerful models, however, still have issues with complicated intervention planning problems, making their use slower than desired. This paper investigates the potential use of Benders decomposition to accelerate the determination of optimal railway intervention programmes for 2.2 km of the Irish Rail network. It is found that the optimal intervention programme is up to 30% faster for the studied example.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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 it