Network-level pavement maintenance and rehabilitation planning considering uncertainties using chance-constrained programming
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In practice, given limited funds, to consider multiple strategic goals/objectives that different stakeholders concern, pavement network-level maintenance and rehabilitation (M&R) planning becomes a multi-objective optimisation (MOO) based project selection and budget allocation problem. In an attempt to solve this problem, most agencies established MOO models under the deterministic situation without appropriate consideration of uncertainties. However, ignoring performance uncertainties often leads to unreasonable decisions. To provide more convincing and reliable pavement M&R decisions, this paper proposes a Chance-Constrained Programming (CCP) based MOO method to incorporate performance uncertainties in network-level single period pavement M&R planning. First, a general deterministic MOO model with budget and network performance constraints is established. Then, three commonly-used statistical forms of network-level performance measures are introduced. To incorporate uncertainties, the probability distribution of each form of performance measure is derived. Based on the CCP method, the MOO model is transformed to an equivalent deterministic formulation as a mixed non-linear integer programming (MNLIP) problem. To demonstrate the proposed method, a case study using real data is conducted. The results show that the proposed method can effectively help decision-makers to appropriately incorporate performance uncertainties in conducting network-level pavement M&R planning.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".