Decision-Making Mechanism to Organize the Agenda of a Guide-Robot

One of the major challenges in evolutionary robotics is constituted by the need of the robot being able to make decisions on its own, in accordance with the multiple tasks programmed, optimizing its timings and power. In this paper, we present a new automatic decision making mechanism for a robot guide that allows the robot to make the best choice in order to reach its aims, performing its tasks in an optimal way. The election of which is the best alternative is based on a series of criteria and restrictions of the tasks to perform. The software developed in the project has been verified on the tour-guide robot Urbano. The most important aspect of this proposal is that the design uses learning as the means to optimize the quality in the decision making. The modeling of the quality index of the best choice to perform is made using fuzzy logic and it represents the beliefs of the robot, which continue to evolve in order to match the "external reality”. This fuzzy system is used to select the most appropriate set of tasks to perform during the day. With this tool, the tour guide-robot prepares its agenda daily, which satisfies the objectives and restrictions, and it identifies the best task to perform at each moment. This work is part of the ARABOT project of the Intelligent Control Research Group at the Universidad Politécnica de Madrid to create "awareness" in a robot guide.

Accessibility instruments for planning practice: bridging the gap between academic research and decision-making.

One of the core objectives of urban planning practice is to provide spatial equity in terms of opportunities and use of public space and facilities. Accessibility is the element that serves this purpose as a concept linking the reciprocal relationship between transport and land use, thus shaping individual potential mobility to reach the desired destinations. Accessibility concepts are increasingly acknowledged as fundamental to understand the functioning of cities and urban regions. Indeed, by introducing them in planning practice, better solutions can be achieved in terms of spatial equity. The COST Action TU1002 "Accessibility instruments for planning practice" was specifically designed to address the gap between scientific research in measuring and modelling accessibility, and the current use of indicators of accessibility in urban planning practice. This paper shows the full process of introducing an easily understandable measure of accessibility to planning practitioners in Madrid, which is one of the case studies of the above-mentioned COST action. Changes in accessibility after the opening of a new metro line using contour measures were analyzed and then presented to a selection of urban planners and practitioners in Madrid as part of a workshop to evaluate the usefulness of this tool for planning practice. Isochrone maps were confirmed as an effective tool, as their utility can be supplemented by other indicators, and being GIS-based, it can be easily computed (when compared with transport models) and integrated with other datasets.

Del plan a la realidad: gobernanza y toma de decisiones en los procesos de regeneración urbana. El caso de Boston = From plan to reality: governance and decision-making in urban regeneration processes in Boston

En las últimas tres décadas, las dinámicas de restructuración económica a nivel global han redefinido radicalmente el papel de las ciudades. La transición del keynesianismo al neoliberalismo ha provocado un cambio en las políticas urbanas de los gobiernos municipales, que han abandonado progresivamente las tareas de regulación y redistribución para centrarse en la promoción del crecimiento económico y la competitividad. En este contexto, muchas voces críticas han señalado que la regeneración urbana se ha convertido en un vehículo de extracción de valor de la ciudad y está provocando la expulsión de los ciudadanos más vulnerables. Sin embargo, la regeneración de áreas consolidadas supone también una oportunidad de mejora de las condiciones de vida de la población residente, y es una política necesaria para controlar la expansión de la ciudad y reducir las necesidades de desplazamiento, promoviendo así ciudades más sostenibles. Partiendo de la hipótesis de que la gobernanza de los procesos de regeneración urbana es clave en el resultado final de las operaciones y determina el modelo de ciudad resultante, el objetivo de esta investigación es verificar si la regeneración urbana es necesariamente un mecanismo de extracción de valor o si puede mejorar la calidad de vida en las ciudades a través de la participación de los ciudadanos. Para ello, propone un marco de análisis del proceso de toma de decisiones en los planes de regeneración urbana y su impacto en los resultados de los planes, tomando como caso de estudio la ciudad de Boston, que desde los años 1990 trata de convertirse en una “ciudad de los barrios”, fomentando la participación ciudadana al tiempo que se posiciona en la escena económica global. El análisis se centra en dos operaciones de regeneración iniciadas a finales de los años 1990. Por un lado, el caso de Jackson Square nos permite comprender el papel de la sociedad civil y el tercer sector en la regeneración de los barrios más desfavorecidos, en un claro ejemplo de urbanismo “desde abajo” (bottom-up planning). Por otro, la reconversión del frente marítimo de South Boston para la construcción del Distrito de Innovación nos acerca a las grandes operaciones de regeneración urbana con fines de estímulo económico, tradicionalmente vinculadas a los centros financieros (downtown) y dirigidas por las élites gubernamentales y económicas (la growth machine) a través de procesos más tecnocráticos (top-down planning). La metodología utilizada consiste en el análisis cualitativo de los procesos de toma de decisiones y la relación entre los agentes implicados, así como de la evaluación de la implementación de dichas decisiones y su influencia en el modelo urbano resultante. El análisis de los casos permite afirmar que la gobernanza de los procesos de regeneración urbana influye decisivamente en el resultado final de las intervenciones; sin embargo, la participación de la comunidad local en la toma de decisiones no es suficiente para que el resultado de la regeneración urbana contrarreste los efectos de la neoliberalización, especialmente si se limita a la fase de planeamiento y no se extiende a la fase de ejecución, y si no está apoyada por una movilización política de mayor alcance que asegure una acción pública redistributiva. Asimismo, puede afirmarse que los procesos de regeneración urbana suponen una redefinición del modelo de ciudad, dado que la elección de los espacios de intervención tiene consecuencias sobre el equilibrio territorial de la ciudad. Los resultados de esta investigación tienen implicaciones para la disciplina del planeamiento urbano. Por una parte, se confirma la vigencia del paradigma del “urbanismo negociado”, si bien bajo discursos de liderazgo público y sin apelación al protagonismo del sector privado. Por otra parte, la planificación colaborativa en un contexto de “responsabilización” de las organizaciones comunitarias puede desactivar la potencia política de la participación ciudadana y servir como “amortiguador” hacia el gobierno local. Asimismo, la sustitución del planeamiento general como instrumento de definición de la ciudad futura por una planificación oportunista basada en la actuación en áreas estratégicas que tiren del resto de la ciudad, no permite definir un modelo coherente y consensuado de la ciudad que se desea colectivamente, ni permite utilizar el planeamiento como mecanismo de redistribución. ABSTRACT In the past three decades, the dynamics of global economic restructuring have radically redefined the role of cities. The transition from keynesianism to neoliberalism has caused a shift in local governments’ urban policies, which have progressively abandoned the tasks of regulation and redistribution to focus on promoting economic growth and competitiveness. In this context, many critics have pointed out that urban regeneration has become a vehicle for extracting value from the city and is causing the expulsion of the most vulnerable citizens. However, regeneration of consolidated areas is also an opportunity to improve the living conditions of the resident population, and is a necessary policy to control the expansion of the city and reduce the need for transportation, thus promoting more sustainable cities. Assuming that the governance of urban regeneration processes is key to the final outcome of the plans and determines the resulting city model, the goal of this research is to verify whether urban regeneration is necessarily a value extraction mechanism or if it can improve the quality of life in cities through citizens’ participation. It proposes a framework for analysis of decision-making in urban regeneration processes and their impact on the results of the plans, taking as a case study the city of Boston, which since the 1990s is trying to become a "city of neighborhoods", encouraging citizen participation, while seeking to position itself in the global economic scene. The analysis focuses on two redevelopment plans initiated in the late 1990s. The Jackson Square case allows us to understand the role of civil society and the third sector in the regeneration of disadvantaged neighborhoods, in a clear example of bottom-up planning. On the contrary, the conversion of the South Boston waterfront to build the Innovation District takes us to the big redevelopment efforts with economic stimulus’ goals, traditionally linked to downtowns and led by government and economic elites (the local “growth machine”) through more technocratic processes (top-down planning). The research is based on a qualitative analysis of the processes of decision making and the relationship between those involved, as well as the evaluation of the implementation of those decisions and their influence on the resulting urban model. The analysis suggests that the governance of urban regeneration processes decisively influences the outcome of interventions; however, community engagement in the decision-making process is not enough for the result of the urban regeneration to counteract the effects of neoliberalization, especially if it is limited to the planning phase and does not extend to the implementation of the projects, and if it is not supported by a broader political mobilization to ensure a redistributive public action. Moreover, urban regeneration processes redefine the urban model, since the choice of intervention areas has important consequences for the territorial balance of the city. The results of this study have implications for the discipline of urban planning. On the one hand, it confirms the validity of the "negotiated planning" paradigm, albeit under public leadership discourse and without a direct appeal to the leadership role of the private sector. On the other hand, collaborative planning in a context of "responsibilization" of community based organizations can deactivate the political power of citizen participation and serve as a "buffer" towards the local government. Furthermore, the replacement of comprehensive planning, as a tool for defining the city's future, by an opportunistic planning based on intervention in strategic areas that are supposed to induce change in the rest of the city, does not allow a coherent and consensual urban model that is collectively desired, nor it allows to use planning as a redistribution mechanism.

Case-based reasoning to support decision making for managing drinking water quality events in distribution systems

Peer reviewed

CERCLA: A Case Study of Local Government Involvement in the Decision-Making Process in Colorado

The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980, and the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) of 1986 strengthen roles of the community in the CERCLA process. Many layers of bureaucracy and the complexity of regulations make the implementation and enforcement of environmental policy a burdensome process. Local government, the public and private corporations have a critical role in the CERCLA decision-making process by implementing a comprehensive public participation process. This paper examines a case study in which a local Colorado health department implemented a successful public participation process in order to positively affect the remediation decision-making process.

Intelligent Decision-Making System Frameworks for a Digital Plan of Work: A Theoretical Investigation for the Construction Industry

The construction industry is characterised by fragmentation and suffers from lack of collaboration, often adopting adversarial working practices to achieve deliverables. For the UK Government and construction industry, BIM is a game changer aiming to rectify this fragmentation and promote collaboration. However it has become clear that there is an essential need to have better controls and definitions of both data deliverables and data classification. Traditional methods and techniques for collating and inputting data have shown to be time consuming and provide little to improve or add value to the overall task of improving deliverables. Hence arose the need in the industry to develop a Digital Plan of Work (DPoW) toolkit that would aid the decision making process, providing the required control over the project workflows and data deliverables, and enabling better collaboration through transparency of need and delivery. The specification for the existing Digital Plan of Work (DPoW) was to be, an industry standard method of describing geometric, requirements and data deliveries at key stages of the project cycle, with the addition of a structured and standardised information classification system. However surveys and interviews conducted within this research indicate that the current DPoW resembles a digitised version of the pre-existing plans of work and does not push towards the data enriched decision-making abilities that advancements in technology now offer. A Digital Framework is not simply the digitisation of current or historic standard methods and procedures, it is a new intelligent driven digital system that uses new tools, processes, procedures and work flows to eradicate waste and increase efficiency. In addition to reporting on conducted surveys above, this research paper will present a theoretical investigation into usage of Intelligent Decision Support Systems within a digital plan of work framework. Furthermore this paper will present findings on the suitability to utilise advancements in intelligent decision-making system frameworks and Artificial Intelligence for a UK BIM Framework. This should form the foundations of decision-making for projects implemented at BIM level 2. The gap identified in this paper is that the current digital toolkit does not incorporate the intelligent characteristics available in other industries through advancements in technology and collation of vast amounts of data that a digital plan of work framework could have access to and begin to develop, learn and adapt for decision-making through the live interaction of project stakeholders.

Dominance, Competition, Compromise or Consensus? Explaining Decision-Making Structures

The previous chapter uncovered important differences between decision-making structures across the 11 processes investigated by this study. As we have noted, both historically and in much contemporary literature, the Swiss political system has been described as highly consensual. And yet, when we focus on differences between decision-making structures across different policy domains, important elements appear that point toward a more conflictual style of decision-making. Both when there is a power balance between coalitions and in the presence of a dominant coalition, coalition interactions are conflictual in the majority of cases. Based on the descriptive account of these differences in Chapter 4, the present chapter studies the conditions under which given decision-making structures emerge. Under which circumstances are actors able to form a dominant coalition, and which conditions lead to a situation where power is more evenly balanced between coalitions? Which conditions lead actors to develop a conflictual rather than a consensual type of interaction? Answering these questions can give us some indication of the factors responsible for different types of decision-making structures.

'Going Public': The Mediatization of Decision-Making Processes

In most Western countries, the media are said to exert an increasing influence on the political game. This development, which has been described variably as a shift towards an 'audience democracy' (Manin 1995) or the 'mediatization of politics' (Mazzoleni and Schulz 1999), emphasizes the increasing importance of the media for political actors and political decision-making. In such a context, political actors need to communicate with both the media and the public in order to gain support for their policy plans and to influence decision-making. The media were noticeably absent from Kriesi's (1980) in-depth analysis of political decision-making in Switzerland. This suggests that in the early 1970s, the media did not matter or mattered far less than they do today.

Looking beneath the Surface: Differences in Decision-Making Structures across Processes

The previous chapter presented the overall decision-making structure in Swiss politics at the beginning of the 21st century. This provides us with a general picture and allows for a comparison over time with the decision-making structure in the 1970s. However, the analysis of the overall decision-making structure potentially neglects important differences between policy domains (Atkinson and Coleman 1989; Knoke et al. 1996; Kriesi et al. 2006a; Sabatier 1987). Policy issues vary across policy domains, as do the political actors involved. In addition, actors may hold different policy preferences from one policy domain to the next, and they may also collaborate with other partners depending on the policy domain at stake. Examining differences between policy domains is particularly appropriate in Switzerland. Because no fixed coalitions of government and opposition exist, actors create different coalitions in each policy domain (Linder and Schwarz 2008). Whereas important parts of the institutional setting are similar across policy domains, decision-making structures might still vary. As was the case with the cross-time analysis conducted in the two previous chapters, a stability of 'rules-in-form' might hide important variations in 'rules-in-use' also across different policy domains.

Political Decision-Making in Switzerland. The Consensus Model under Pressure

This in-depth study of the decision-making processes of the early 2000s shows that the Swiss consensus democracy has changed considerably. Power relations have transformed, conflict has increased, coalitions have become more unstable and outputs less predictable. Yet these challenges to consensus politics provide opportunities for innovation.

Reactive, Slow and...Innovative? Decision-making Structures and Policy Outputs

Consensus democracies like Switzerland are generally known to have a low innovation capacity (Lijphart 1999). This is due to the high number of veto points such as perfect bicameralism or the popular referendum. These institutions provide actors opposing a policy with several opportunities to block potential policy change (Immergut 1990; Tsebelis 2002). In order to avoid a failure of a process because opposing actors activate veto points, decision-making processes in Switzerland tend to integrate a large number of actors with different - and often diverging - preferences (Kriesi and Trechsel 2008). Including a variety of actors in a decision-making process and taking into account their preferences implies important trade-offs. Integrating a large number of actors and accommodating their preferences takes time and carries the risk of resulting in lowest common denominator solutions. On the contrary, major innovative reforms usually fail or come only as a result of strong external pressures from either the international environment, economic turmoil or the public (Kriesi 1980: 635f.; Kriesi and Trechsel 2008; Sciarini 1994). Standard decision-making processes are therefore characterized as reactive, slow and capable of only marginal adjustments (Kriesi 1980; Kriesi and Trechsel 2008; Linder 2009; Sciarini 2006). This, in turn, may be at odds with the rapid developments of international politics, the flexibility of the private sector, or the speed of technological development.

Analysis of performance measurement and training requirements for driving decision making in emergency situations. Final report.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, D.C.

A framework for military decision making under risks /

"August 1997."

Executive decision making : observations and experience in business and government /

Mode of access: Internet.