MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7128548746 · doi:10.14339/sto-sas-ora-2022-2

Using Reinforcement Learning to Provide Decision Support in Multi-Domain Mass Evacuation Operations

2023· article· W7128548746 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueNATO Journal of Science and Technology · 2023
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicEvacuation and Crowd Dynamics
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReinforcement learningMarkov decision processCurse of dimensionalityBenchmark (surveying)Context (archaeology)Set (abstract data type)Decision support systemBellman equationFunction (biology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we study a scenario in which a large number of individuals in various levels of medical distress are stranded at a remote location, such as in the Arctic, and must be evacuated. Set within this context, we examine a multi-domain operation in which the evacuation of individuals occurs via one of two ways, either by helicopter or by ship, each with their own capacity constraints. The aim of this research is to determine a decision policy whose objective is to maximize the number of survivors. This is achieved by seeking a policy that throughout the operation effectively coordinates the selection of those individuals to be evacuated via helicopter and those to be evacuated via ship. Our contributions are twofold. First, we formulate the multi-domain mass evacuation operation as a Markov Decision Process. Second, due to the fact that the curse of dimensionality renders exact methods not applicable, we employ an Artificial Intelligence framework, namely, Reinforcement Learning (RL), also known as Approximate Dynamic Programming (ADP) within operations research, to learn a near-optimal policy. Using a value function approximation based on state aggregation, we design an ADP algorithm to learn a policy within the context of a representative planning scenario. We then apply this policy across a range of test scenarios and compare the outcomes to those achieved using non-coordinated benchmark policies. Although our learned policy does not outperform all benchmarks, our results demonstrate how Artificial Intelligence may be used to evaluate candidate policies and provide decision support in multi-domain operations.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.213
Threshold uncertainty score0.624

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.301 · 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