MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402949150 · doi:10.1061/jitse4.iseng-2489

Multiyear Maintenance and Rehabilitation Optimization for Large-Scale Infrastructure Networks: An Enhanced Genetic Algorithm Approach

2024· article· en· W4402949150 on OpenAlexaff
Amir Keshvari Fard, Xian‐Xun Yuan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Infrastructure Systems · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGenetic algorithmScale (ratio)Computer scienceRehabilitationOptimization algorithmOperations researchMathematical optimizationDistributed computingEngineeringMachine learningMathematicsGeographyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multiyear network maintenance and rehabilitation optimization is a key, longstanding challenge for infrastructure asset management. Although genetic algorithms (GAs) have been widely used as the default optimization tool, successes were limited to small-scale networks. As the network size increases, the performance of conventional GAs quickly deteriorates because the traditional crossover and mutation operations disrupt promising solution compositions and drastically reduce the likelihood of obtaining a feasible solution. To address this gap, this paper introduced an enhanced GA that pivots on two innovations: a new crossover technique that swaps annual plans as a block of genes; and a novel mutation technique that incorporates linear programming (LP) to solve annual plans with a randomly perturbed budget profile. Both operations preserved the integrity of individual annual plans throughout the evolutionary process and enhanced local search capabilities. The hybrid LP-GA was tested with two practical case studies, one with a small-scale sewer network flushing program, and the other involving 13,610 pavement segments. Both case studies showed that the proposed algorithm quickly converged with 100% feasible solutions to optimum or near-to-optimum solutions. Through this work, we offered a sophisticated algorithmic tool for infrastructure planning, setting a stage for further advances in the domain.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Infrastructure SystemsSame topicInfrastructure Maintenance and MonitoringFrench-language works237,207