Advertisement

Generating evacuation task plans for community typhoon emergencies: an integration of case-driven and model-driven approaches

  • Zhao-ge LiuEmail author
  • Xiang-yang Li
  • Dilawar Khan Durrani
Original paper
  • 36 Downloads

Abstract

In community emergency management, it is crucial to generate evacuation task plans (ETPs) to help reduce risks in complex disaster situations. Case-driven and model-driven approaches have their respective advantages in generating ETPs, which can complement each other. With case-driven approach, historical experience can be fully used to establish the relationship between typhoon scenarios and historical ETPs. Through model-driven approach, the continuity of ETPs can be guaranteed when required information to operate the plans is missing. This study aims at proposing an integrated approach that can combine the benefits of both case-driven approaches and model-driven approaches. Based on the structural modeling of evacuation tasks, this paper proposes an integrated approach to generate ETPs for community typhoon emergencies. Finally, a case that is based on actual problems is provided to verify the reasonability and effectiveness of the proposed method.

Keywords

Community typhoon emergencies Evacuation task plans Case-driven approach Model-driven approach Integrated approach 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work is supported by the Major Research Project of Nation Natural Science Foundation of China named “Big data Driven Management and Decision-making Research” (No. 91746207), the General Program of Nation Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 71774043) and the Emergency Management Major Research Project of Nation Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 91024028).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The Authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Amailef K, Lu J (2013) Ontology-supported case-based reasoning approach for intelligent m-Government emergency response services. Decis Support Syst 55:79–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bish DR, Sherali HD (2013) Aggregate-level demand management in evacuation planning. Eur J Oper Res 224:79–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Blecic I, Cecchini A, Pusceddu C (2008) Constructing strategies in strategic planning: a decision support evaluation model. Oper Res Int J 8:153–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bretschneider S, Kimms A (2012) Pattern-based evacuation planning for urban areas. Eur J Oper Res 216:57–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chassiakos AP (2006) Longest path time-cost analysis of construction projects with generalised activity constraints. Oper Res Int J 6:271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chen R, Sharman R, Rao HR, Upadhyaya SJ (2013) Data model development for fire related extreme events: an activity theory approach. MIS Quart 37:125–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. China Meteorological Administration (2017a) Guangdong: starting 3rd level emergency response during Pakhar. http://www.cma.gov.cn/2011xwzx/2011xgzdt/201708/t20170826_447380.html/ Accessed 21 March 2018
  8. China Meteorological Administration (2017b) Overlapping influences need to be considered during Pakhar. http://www.cma.gov.cn/2011xwzx/2011xqxxw/2011xqxyw/201708/t20170827_447438.html/ Accessed 21 March 2018
  9. Fan ZP, Li YH, Zhang Y (2015) Generating project risk response strategies based on CBR: a case study. Expert Syst Appl 42:2870–2883CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Godinho P, Costa JP (2017) A stochastic model and algorithms for determining efficient time–cost tradeoffs for a project activity. Oper Res Int J.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12351-017-0326-5 Google Scholar
  11. Hu Y, Zhang XZ, Ngai EWT, Cai RC, Liu M (2013) Software project risk analysis using Bayesian networks with causality constraint. Decis Support Syst 56:439–449CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ju Y, Wang A, Liu X (2012) Evaluating emergency response capacity by fuzzy AHP and 2-tuple fuzzy linguistic approach. Expert Syst Appl 39:6972–6981CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kim HY, Won CH (2018) Forecasting the volatility of stock price index: a hybrid model integrating LSTM with multiple GARCH-type models. Expert Syst Appl 103:25–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kolen B, Helsloot I (2014) Decision-making and evacuation planning for flood risk management in the Netherlands. Disasters 38:610–635CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Krleza D, Fertalj K (2017) Graph matching using hierarchical fuzzy graph neural networks. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 25:892–904CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Liu D, Wang H, Qi C, Zhao P, Wang J (2016) Hierarchical task network-based emergency task planning with incomplete information, concurrency and uncertain duration. Knowl Based Syst 112:67–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lupiani E, Juarez JM, Palma J, Marin R (2017) Monitoring elderly people at home with temporal case-based reasoning. Knowl-Based Syst 134:116–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ongkunaruk P, Wongsatit W (2014) An ECRS-based line balancing concept: a case study of a frozen chicken producer. Bus Process Manag J 20:678–692CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Othman SH, Beydoun G (2013) Model-driven disaster management. Inf Manag Amster 50:218–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Perry RW, Lindell MK (2003) Preparedness for emergency response: guidelines for the emergency planning process. Disasters 27:336–350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Prashar S, Shaw R, Takeuchi Y (2013) Community action planning in East Delhi: a participatory approach to build urban disaster resilience. Mitig Adapt Strat Glob 18:429–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Psaromiligkos Y, Orfanidou M, Kytagias C, Zafiri E (2011) Mining log data for the analysis of learners’ behaviour in web-based learning management systems. Oper Res Int J 11:187–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Pyakurel U, Dhamala TN (2016) Continuous dynamic contraflow approach for evacuation planning. Ann Oper Res 253:573–598CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Rabbani M, Sabbaghnia A, Mobini M et al (2018) A graph theory-based algorithm for a multi-echelon multi-period responsive supply chain network design with lateral-transshipments. Oper Res Int J.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12351-018-0425-y Google Scholar
  25. Restrepo CE, Simonoff JS, Zimmerman RZ (2009) Causes, cost consequences, and risk implications of accidents in US hazardous liquid pipeline infrastructure. Int J Crit Infrastruct Prot 2:38–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Shui XG, Zuo XQ, Chen C, Smith AE (2015) A clonal selection algorithm for urban bus vehicle scheduling. Appl Soft Comput 36:36–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Tang P, Shen GQP (2015) Decision-making model to generate novel emergency response plans for improving coordination during large-scale emergencies. Knowl Based Syst 90:111–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Thompson RR, Garfin DR, Silver RC (2017) Evacuation from natural disasters: a systematic review of the literature. Risk Anal 37:812–839CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Van der Aalst W (2018) Spreadsheets for business process management Using process mining to deal with “events” rather than “numbers”? Bus Process Manag J 24:105–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Yang L, Su G, Yuan H (2012) Design principles of integrated information platform for emergency responses: the case of 2008 Beijing Olympic Games. Inf Syst Res 23:761–786CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Yu F, Li XY, Han XS (2018) Risk response for urban water supply network using case-based reasoning during a natural disaster. Saf Sci 106:121–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Zhang Y (2016) Selecting risk response strategies considering project risk interdependence. Int J Project Manag 34:819–830CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Zhang Y, Fan ZP (2014) An optimization method for selecting project risk response strategies. Int J Project Manag 32:412–422CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Zhang M, Gable GG (2017) A systematic framework for multilevel theorizing in information systems research. Inf Syst Res 28:203–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Zhang B, Li XY, Wang S (2015) A novel case adaptation method based on an improved integrated genetic algorithm for power grid wind disaster emergencies. Expert Syst Appl 42:7812–7824CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Zhao P, Wang H, Qi C, Liu D (2017) HTN planning with uncontrollable durations for emergency decision-making. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 33:1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Zhu ZQ, Hsu HY, Nagalingam S, Geng L (2013) Literature review on the creativity of CBR applications. Artif Intell Rev 40:379–390CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of ManagementHarbin Institute of TechnologyHarbinChina

Personalised recommendations