Javed, F (2010) Integrated prioritization and optimization approach for pavement management. PhD thesis, National University of Singapore, Singapore.
Abstract
This thesis proposes an improved methodology of incorporating priority preferences into pavement maintenance programming to overcome these problems. Instead of applying priority weights directly into the mathematical formulation of maintenance programming, priority preferences are handled in two stages of post-processing of the optimal programming process, namely a tie-breaking analysis and a trade-off analysis. The optimal programming problem is first solved without applying priority weights to any parameters of the problem. This ensures that the optimality of the solution is not disturbed. In the tie-breaking post-processing, prioritized maintenance activities are identified to replace lower priority activities in the solution, without affecting the optimality of the solution. Finally, a trade-off analysis is performed to introduce more prioritized activities into the solution based on the willingness of the highway agency to accept some loss in optimality. The entire framework is clearly illustrated using examples.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Fang, F T |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | optimization; highway; pavement; programming |
| Index terms: | post-processing, preference, agency, methodology, programming |
| Subjects: | research methods, decision-making and reasoning, sociology, programming, data science |
| Topics: | Digital Applications, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here