MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396681160 · doi:10.14796/jwmm.c515

Mathematical Program with Vanishing Constraints for Optimal Pressure Control in Water Distribution Systems

2024· article· en· W4396681160 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Pham Duc Dai

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Water Management Modeling · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater Systems and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDistribution (mathematics)Control (management)Mathematical optimizationComputer scienceMathematicsMathematical analysisArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Optimizing pressure management to reduce water leakage in water distribution systems (WDSs) is one of the major tasks for water utilities. By regulating the operation of pressure reducing valves (PRVs) installed in WDSs, the pressure in WDSs can be kept under control and thus the water leakage amount can be decreased. Mathematically, the problem of pressure management to water leakage reduction can be formulated as a nonlinear optimization program. To make the optimization model proper for practice, the model of PRVs should be accurate and can describe all its operation modes in practice: active, fully opened, and check valve modes. In the literature, the model can be represented either by a non-smooth equation with low accuracy or by several complicated constraints. This research developed a highly accurate PRV model based on vanishing constraints. The idea comes from the fact that the model equation representing operations of PRVs in active mode will be vanished as PRVs operate in the check valve mode. The formulated mathematical program with vanishing constraints (MPVCs) can be solved efficiently by using the regularization approach. Several WDSs have evaluated the new PRV model which shows that accurate solutions are obtained with less computation time.

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 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)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.963
Threshold uncertainty score0.359

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Water Management ModelingSame topicWater Systems and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207