美赛论文1
美赛论文
注：LEO 低地球轨道MEO中地球轨道GeO 同步卫星轨道risk-profit 风险利润率fixed-profit rate 固定利润率提出一个合理的商业计划，可以使我们抓住商业机会，我们建立四个模型来分析三个替代方案（水射流，激光，卫星）和组合，然后确定是否存在一个经济上有吸引力的机会，从而设计了四种模型分析空间碎片的风险、成本、利润和预测。
首先，我们建立了利润模型基于净现值（NPV）模型，并确定三个最佳组合的替代品与定性分析：1）考虑了三个备选方案的组合时，碎片的量是巨大的；2）考虑了水射流和激光的结合，认为碎片的大小不太大；3）把卫星和激光的结合当尺寸的这些碎片足够大。
其次，建立风险定性分析模型，对影响因素进行分析在每一种替代的风险，并得出一个结论，风险将逐渐下降直到达到一个稳定的数字。
在定量分析技术投入和对设备的影响投资中，我们建立了双重技术的学习曲线模型,找到成本的变化规律与时间的变化。
然后，我们开发的差分方程预测模型预测的量在未来的四年内每年发射的飞机。
结合结果我们从预测中，我们可以确定最佳的去除选择。
最后，分析了模型的灵敏度，讨论了模型的优势和我们的模型的弱点，目前的非技术性的信，指出了未来工作。
目录1，简介1.1问题的背景1.2可行方案1.3一般的假设1.4我们的思想的轮廓2，我们的模型2.1 时间---利润模型2.1.1 模型的符号2.1.2 模型建立2.1.3 结果与分析2.2 . 差分方程的预测模型2.2.1 模型建立2.2.2 结果分析2.3 双因子技术-学习曲线模型2.3.1 模型背景知识2.3.2 模型的符号2.3.3 模型建立2.3.4 结果分析2.4风险定性分析模型2.4.1 模型背景2.4.2 模型建立2.4.3 结果与分析3．在我们模型的灵敏度分析3.1 差分方程的预测模型。
3.1.1 稳定性分析3.1.2 敏感性分析3.2 双因子技术学习曲线模型3.2.1 稳定性分析3.2.2 敏感性分析4 优点和缺点查分方程预测模型优点缺点双因子技术学习曲线模型优点缺点时间---利润模型优点缺点5..结论6..未来的工作7．参考双赢模式：拯救地球，抓住机遇1..简介问题的背景空间曾经很干净整洁。
建模美赛获奖范文
建模美赛获奖范文全文共四篇示例，供读者参考第一篇示例：近日，我校数学建模团队在全国大学生数学建模竞赛中荣获一等奖的喜讯传来，这是我校首次在该比赛中获得如此优异的成绩。
本文将从建模过程、团队合作、参赛经验等方面进行详细介绍，希望能为更多热爱数学建模的同学提供一些借鉴和参考。
让我们来了解一下比赛的背景和要求。
全国大学生数学建模竞赛是由中国工程院主办，旨在促进大学生对数学建模的兴趣和掌握数学建模的基本方法和技巧。
比赛通常会设置一些实际问题，参赛队伍需要在规定时间内通过建立数学模型、分析问题、提出解决方案等步骤来完成任务。
最终评选出的优胜队伍将获得一等奖、二等奖等不同级别的奖项。
在本次比赛中，我们团队选择了一道关于城市交通拥堵研究的题目，并从交通流理论、路网优化等角度进行建模和分析。
通过对城市交通流量、拥堵原因、路段限制等方面的研究，我们提出了一种基于智能交通系统的解决方案，有效缓解了城市交通拥堵问题。
在展示环节，我们通过图表、数据分析等方式清晰地呈现了我们的建模过程和成果，最终赢得了评委的认可。
在整个建模过程中，团队合作起着至关重要的作用。
每个成员都发挥了自己的专长和优势，在分析问题、建模求解、撰写报告等方面各司其职。
团队内部的沟通和协作非常顺畅，大家都能积极提出自己的想法和看法，达成共识后再进行实际操作。
通过团队合作，我们不仅完成了比赛的任务，也培养了团队精神和合作能力，这对我们日后的学习和工作都具有重要意义。
参加数学建模竞赛是一次非常宝贵的经历，不仅能提升自己的数学建模能力，也能锻炼自己的解决问题的能力和团队协作能力。
在比赛的过程中，我们学会了如何快速建立数学模型、如何分析和解决实际问题、如何展示自己的成果等，这些能力对我们未来的学习和工作都将大有裨益。
在未来，我们将继续努力，在数学建模领域不断学习和提升自己的能力，为更多的实际问题提供有效的数学解决方案。
我们也希望通过自己的经验和教训，为更多热爱数学建模的同学提供一些指导和帮助，共同进步，共同成长。
美赛论文(最终版)
For office use onlyT1________________ T2________________ T3________________ T4________________Team Control Number 46639Problem ChosenCFor office use onlyF1________________F2________________F3________________F4________________2016 MCM/ICM Summary SheetAn Optimal Investment Strategy ModelSummaryWe develop an optimal investment strategy model that appears to hold promise for providing insight into not only how to sort the schools according to investment priority, but also identify optimal investment amount of a specific school. This model considers a large number of parameters thought to be important to investment in the given College Scorecard Data Set.In order to develop the required model, two sub-models are constructed as follows: 1.For Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) Model, we identify the prioritizedcandidate list of schools by synthesizing the elements which have an influence on investment. First we define the specific value of any two elements’ effect on investment. And then the weight of each element’s influence on investment can be identified. Ultimately, we take the relevant parameters into the calculated weight, and then we get any school’s recommended value of investment.2.For Return On Investment M odel, it’s constructed on the basis of AHP Model.Let us suppose that all the investment is used to help the students to pay tuition fee.Then we can see optimal investment as that we help more students to the universities of higher return rate. However, because of dropout rate, there will be an optimization investment amount in each university. Therefore, we can change the problem into a nonlinear programming problem. We identify the optimal investment amount by maximizing return-on-investment.Specific attention is given to the stability and error analysis of our model. The influence of the model is discussed when several fundamental parameters vary. We attempt to use our model to prioritize the schools and identify investment amount of the candidate schools, and then an optimal investment strategy is generated. Ultimately, to demonstrate how our model works, we apply it to the given College Scorecard Data Set. For various situations, we propose an optimal solution. And we also analyze the strengths and weaknesses of our model. We believe that we can make our model more precise if more information are provided.Contents1.Introduction 21.1Restatement of the Problem (2)1.2Our Approach (2)2.Assumptions 23.Notations 34.The Optimal Investment Model 44.1Analytic Hierarchy Process Model (4)4.1.1Constructing the Hierarchy (4)4.1.2Constructing the Judgement Matrix (5)4.1.3Hierarchical Ranking (7)4.2Return On Investment Model (8)4.2.1Overview of the investment strategy (8)4.2.2Analysis of net income and investment cost (9)4.2.3Calculate Return On Investment (11)4.2.4Maximize the Total Net Income (11)5.Test the Model125.1Error Analysis (12)5.2Stability Analysis (13)6.Results136.1Results of Analytic Hierarchy Process (13)6.2Results of Return On Investment Model (14)7.Strengths and Weaknesses157.1Strengths (15)7.2Weaknesses (16)References16 Appendix A Letter to the Chief Financial Officer, Mr. Alpha Chiang.171.Introduction1.1Restatement of the ProblemIn order to help improve educational performance of undergraduates attending colleges and universities in the US, the Goodgrant Foundation intends to donate a total of $100,000,000 to an appropriate group of schools per year, for five years, starting July 2016. We are to develop a model to determine an optimal investment strategy that identifies the school, the investment amount per school, the return on that investment, and the time duration that the organization’s money should be provided to have the highest likelihood of producing a strong positive effect on student performance. Considering that they don’t want to duplicate the investments and focus of other large grant organizations, we interpret optimal investment as a strategy that maximizes the ROI on the premise that we help more students attend better colleges. So the problems to be solved are as follows:1.How to prioritize the schools by optimization level.2.How to measure ROI of a school.3.How to measure investment amount of a specific school.1.2Our ApproachWe offer a model of optimal investment which takes a great many factors in the College Scorecard Data Set into account. To begin with, we make a 1 to N optimized and prioritized candidate list of school we are recommending for investment by the AHP model. For the sake that we invest more students to better school, several factors are considered in the AHP model, such as SAT score, ACT score, etc. And then, we set investment amount of each university in the order of the list according to the standard of maximized ROI. The implement details of the model will be described in section 4.2.AssumptionsWe make the following basic assumptions in order to simplify the problem. And each of our assumptions is justified.1.Investment amount is mainly used for tuition and fees. Considering that theincome of an undergraduate is usually much higher than a high school students, we believe that it’s necessary to help more poor students have a chance to go to college.2.Bank rates will not change during the investment period. The variation ofthe bank rates have a little influence on the income we consider. So we make this assumption just to simplify the model.3.The employment rates and dropout rates will not change, and they aredifferent for different schools4.For return on investment, we only consider monetary income, regardlessof the intangible income.3.NotationsWe use a list of symbols for simplification of expression.4.The Optimal Investment ModelIn this section, we first prioritize schools by the AHP model (Section 4.1), and then calculate ROI value of the schools (Section 4.2). Ultimately, we identify investment amount of every candidate schools according to ROI (Section 4.3).4.1Analytic Hierarchy Process ModelIn order to prioritize schools, we must consider each necessary factor in the College Scorecard Data Set. For each factor, we calculate its weight value. And then, we can identify the investment necessity of each school. So, the model can be developed in 3 steps as follows:4.1.1Constructing the HierarchyWe consider 19 elements to measure priority of candidate schools, which can be seen in Fig 1. The hierarchy could be diagrammed as follows:Fig.1AHP for the investment decisionThe goal is red, the criteria are green and the alternatives are blue. All the alternatives are shown below the lowest level of each criterion. Later in the process, each alternatives will be rated with respect to the criterion directly above it.As they build their hierarchy, we should investigate the values or measurements of the different elements that make it up. If there are published fiscal policy, for example, or school policy, they should be gathered as part of the process. This information will be needed later, when the criteria and alternatives are evaluated.Note that the structure of the investment hierarchy might be different for other foundations. It would definitely be different for a foundation who doesn't care how much his score is, knows he will never dropout, and is intensely interested in math, history, and the numerous aspects of study[1].4.1.2Constructing the Judgement MatrixHierarchy reflects the relationship among elements to consider, but elements in the Criteria Layer don’t always weigh equal during aim measure. In deciders’ mind, each element accounts for a particular proportion.To incorporate their judgments about the various elements in the hierarchy, decision makers compare the elements “two by two”. The fundamental scale for pairwise comparison are shown in Fig 2.Fig 2Right now, let's see which items are compared. Our example will begin with the six criteria in the second row of the hierarchy in Fig 1, though we could begin elsewhere if we want. The criteria will be compared as to how important they are to the decisionmakers, with respect to the goal. Each pair of items in this row will be compared.Fig 3 Investment Judgement MatrixIn the next row, there is a group of 19 alternatives under the criterion. In the subgroup, each pair of alternatives will be compared regarding their importance with respect to the criterion. (As always, their importance is judged by the decision makers.) In the subgroup, there is only one pair of alternatives. They are compared as to how important they are with respect to the criterion.Things change a bit when we get to the alternatives row. Here, the factor in each group of alternatives are compared pair-by-pair with respect to the covering criterion of the group, which is the node directly above them in the hierarchy. What we are doing here is evaluating the models under consideration with respect to score, then with respect to Income, then expenditure, dropout rate, debt and graduation rate.The foundation can evaluate alternatives against their covering criteria in any order they choose. In this case, they choose the order of decreasing priority of the covering criteria.Fig 4 Score Judgement MatrixFig 5 Expenditure Judgement MatrixFig 6 Income Judgement MatrixFig 7 Dropout Judgement MatrixFig 8 Debt Judgement MatrixFig 9 Graduation Matrix4.1.3 Hierarchical RankingWhen the pairwise comparisons are as numerous as those in our example, specialized AHP software can help in making them quickly and efficiently. We will assume that the foundation has access to such software, and that it allows the opinions of various foundations to be combined into an overall opinion for the group.The AHP software uses mathematical calculations to convert these judgments to priorities for each of the six criteria. The details of the calculations are beyond the scope of this article, but are readily available elsewhere[2][3][4][5]. The software also calculates a consistency ratio that expresses the internal consistency of the judgments that have been entered. In this case the judgments showed acceptable consistency, and the software used the foundation’s inputs to assign these new priorities to the criteria:Fig 10.AHP hierarchy for the foundation investing decision.In the end, the AHP software arranges and totals the global priorities for each of the alternatives. Their grand total is 1.000, which is identical to the priority of the goal. Each alternative has a global priority corresponding to its "fit" to all the foundation's judgments about all those aspects of factor. Here is a summary of the global priorities of the alternatives:Fig 114.2 ROI Model4.2.1 Overview of the investment strategyConsider a foundation making investment on a set of N geographically dispersed colleges and university in the United States, D = {1, 2, 3……N }. Then we can select top N schools from the candidate list which has been sorted through analytic hierarchy process. The total investment amount is M per year which is donated by the Goodgrant Foundation. The investment amount is j m for each school j D ∈, satisfying the following balance constraint:j j D mM ∈=∑ (1)W e can’t invest too much or too little money to one school because we want to help more students go to college, and the student should have more choices. Then the investment amount for each school must have a lower limit lu and upper limit bu as follows:j lu m bu ≤≤ (2)The tuition and fees is j p , and the time duration is {1,2,3,4}j t ∈. To simplify ourmodel, we assume that our investment amount is only used for freshmen every year. Because a freshmen oriented investment can get more benefits compared with others. For each school j D ∈, the number of the undergraduate students who will be invested is j n , which can be calculated by the following formula ：,jj j j m n j D p t =∈⨯ (3)Figure12The foundation can use the ROI model to identify j m and j t so that it canmaximize the total net income. Figure1 has shown the overview of our investment model. We will then illustrate the principle and solution of this model by a kind of nonlinear programming method.4.2.2 Analysis of net income and investment costIn our return on investment model, we first focus on analysis of net income and investment cost. Obviously, the future earnings of undergraduate students are not only due to the investment itself. There are many meaning factors such as the effort, the money from their parents, the training from their companies. In order to simplify the model, we assume that the investment cost is the most important element and we don’t consider other possible influence factors. Then we can conclude that the total cost of the investment is j m for each school j D ∈.Figure 13For a single student, the meaning of the investment benefits is the expected earnings in the future. Assuming that the student is not going to college or university after graduating from high school and is directly going to work. Then his wage base is 0b as a high school graduate. If he works as a college graduate, then his wage base is 0a . Then we can give the future proceeds of life which is represented symbolically by T and we use r to represent the bank rates which will change over time. We assume that the bank rates will not change during the investment period. Here, we use bank rates in 2016 to represent the r . The future proceeds of life of a single undergraduate student will be different due to individual differences such as age, physical condition environment, etc. If we consider these differences, the calculation process will be complicated. For simplicity’s sake, we uniform the future proceeds of life T for 20 years. Then we will give two economics formulas to calculate the total expected income in the next T years for graduates and high school graduates:40(1)Tk k a u r +==+∑(4) 40(1)T kk b h r +==+∑(5) The total expected income of a graduate is u , and the total expected income of a highschool graduate is h .Then, we continue to analyze the net income. The net income can be calculated by the following formula:os NetIncome TotalIncome C t =- (6) For each school j D ∈, the net income is j P , the total income is j Q , and the cost is j m . Then we will get the following equation through formula (6):j j j P Q m =- (7)Therefore, the key of the problem is how to calculate j Q . In order to calculate j Q, weneed to estimate the number of future employment j ne . The total number of the invested is j n , which has been calculated above. Considering the dropout rates j α and the employment rates j β for each school j , we can calculate the number of future employment j ne through the following formula:(4)(1)jt j j j j n e n βα-=⨯⨯- (8)That way, we can calculate j Q by the following formula:()j j Q ne u h =⨯- (9)Finally, we take Eq. (2) (3) (4) (7) (8) into Eq. (6), and we will obtain Eq. (9) as follows:4(4)00400(1)()(1)(1)j TT t j j j j j k kk k j jm a b P m p t r r βα+-+===⨯⨯-⨯--⨯++∑∑ (10) We next reformulate the above equation of j P for concise presentation:(4)(1)j t j jj j j jc m P m t λα-⨯⨯=⨯-- (11)where jj j p βλ= and 400400(1)(1)TT k kk k a b c r r ++===-++∑∑ .4.2.3 Calculate Return On InvestmentROI is short of return on investment which can be determined by net income andinvestment cost [7]. It conveys the meaning of the financial assessment. For each schoolj D ∈ , the net income is j P , and the investment cost equals to j m . Then the j ROIcan be calculated by the following formula:100%j j jP ROI m =⨯ (12)We substitute Eq. (10) into Eq. (11), and we will get a new formula as follows:(4)((1)1)100%j t j j j jc ROI t λα-⨯=⨯--⨯ (13)4.2.4 Maximize the Total Net IncomeGiven the net income of each school, we formulate the portfolio problem that maximize the total net income, S=Max(4)((1))j t j jj j j j Dj Djc m P m t λα-∈∈⨯⨯=⨯--∑∑ (14)S. T.jj DmM ∈=∑,{1,2,3,4}t = ,j lu m bu ≤≤ ,Considering the constraint jj DmM ∈=∑, we can further simplify the model,S is equivalent to S’=Max(4)((1))j t j jj j j Dj Djc m P t λα-∈∈⨯⨯=⨯-∑∑ (15)S. T.jj DmM ∈=∑,{1,2,3,4t = ,j l u m b u ≤≤. By solving the nonlinear programming problem S’, we can get the sameanswer as problem S.5. Testing the Model 5.1 Error AnalysisSince the advent of analytic hierarchy process, people pay more attention to it due to the specific applicability, convenience, practicability and systematization of the method. Analytic hierarchy process has not reached the ideal situation whether in theory or application level because the results depend largely on the preference and subjective judgment. In this part, we will analyze the human error problem in analytic hierarchy process.Human error is mainly caused by human factors. The human error mainly reflects on the structure of the judgment matrix. The causes of the error are the following points:1. The number of times that human judge the factors’ importance is excessive.2. The calibration method is not perfect.Then we will give some methods to reduce errors:1. Reduce times of human judgment. One person repeatedly gave the samejudgment between two factors. Or many persons gave the same judgment between two factors one time. Finally, we take the average as result.2. Break the original calibration method. If we have defined the ranking vector111121(,...)n a a a a =between the factor 1A with others. Then we can get all theother ranking vector. For example : 12122111(,1...)na a a a a =.5.2 Stability AnalysisIt is necessary to analyze the stability of ranking result [6], because the strong subjectivefactors. If the ranking result changed a little while the judgment changed a lot, we can conclude that the method is effective and the result is acceptable, and vice versa. We assume that the weight of other factors will change if the weight of one factor changed from i ξ to i η:[8](1)(,1,2...,)(1)i j j i i j n i j ηξηξ-⨯==≠- (16)And it is simple to verify the equation:11nii η==∑ (17)And the new ranking vector ω will be:A ωη=⨯ (18)By this method, the Relative importance between other factors remain the same while one of the factor has changed.6. Results6.1 Results of Analytic Hierarchy ProcessWe can ranking colleges through the analytic hierarchy process, and we can get the top N = 20 schools as follows6.2 Results of Return On Investment ModelBased on the results above, we next use ROI model to distribute investment amountj m and time duration j t for each school j D ∈ by solving the following problem:Max (4)((1))j t j jj j j Dj Djc m P t λα-∈∈⨯⨯=⨯-∑∑S. T.jj DmM ∈=∑,{1,2,3,4t = , j l u m b u≤≤ . In order to solve the problem above, we collected the data from different sources. Inthe end, we solve the model with Lingo software. The program code is as follows:model: sets:roi/1..20/:a,b,p,m,t;endsets data:a = 0.9642 0.9250 0.9484 0.9422 0.9402 0.9498 0.90490.9263 0.9769 0.9553 0.9351 0.9123 0.9410 0.98610.9790 0.9640 0.8644 0.9598 0.9659 0.9720;b = 0.8024 0.7339 0.8737 0.8308 0.8681 0.7998 0.74920.6050 0.8342 0.8217 0.8940 0.8873 0.8495 0.87520.8333 0.8604 0.8176 0.8916 0.7527 0.8659;p = 3.3484 3.7971 3.3070 3.3386 3.3371 3.4956 3.22204.0306 2.8544 3.1503 3.2986 3.3087 3.3419 2.78452.9597 2.92713.3742 2.7801 2.5667 2.8058;c = 49.5528;enddatamax=@sum(roi(I):m(I)/t(I)/p(I)*((1-b(I))^4)*c*(1-a(I)+0.05)^(4-t(I)));@for(roi:@gin(t));@for(roi(I):@bnd(1,t(I),4));@for(roi(I):@bnd(0,m(I),100));@sum(roi(I):m(I))=1000;ENDFinally, we can get the investment amount and time duration distribution as follows:7.Strengths and Weaknesses7.1Strengths1.Fixing the bank rates during the investment period may run out, but it will haveonly marginal influences.2.For return on investment, we only consider monetary income, regardless of the3.intangible income. But the quantization of these intangible income is very importantand difficult. It needs to do too much complicated technical analysis and to quantify 4.too many variables. Considering that the investment persists for a short time, thiskind of random error is acceptable.5.Due to our investment which is freshmen oriented, other students may feel unfair.It is likely to produce adverse reaction to our investment strategy.6.The cost estimation is not impeccable. We only consider the investment amount andignore other non-monetary investment.5. AHP needs higher requirements for personnel quality.7.2Weaknesses1.Our investment strategy is distinct and clear, and it is convenient to implement.2.Our model not only identifies the investment amount for each school, but alsoidentifies the time duration that the organization’s money should be provide d.3.Data processing is convenient, because the most data we use is constant, average ormedian.4.Data sources are reliable. Our investment strategy is based on some meaningful anddefendable subset of two data sets.5.AHP is more simple, effective and universal.References[1] Saaty, Thomas L. (2008). Decision Making for Leaders: The Analytic Hierarchy Process for Decisions in a Complex World. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: RWS Publications. ISBN 0-9620317-8-X.[2] Bhushan, Navneet, Kanwal Rai (January 2004). Strategic Decision Making: Applying the Analytic Hierarchy Process. London: Springer-Verlag. ISBN 1-8523375-6-7.[3] Saaty, Thomas L. (2001). Fundamentals of Decision Making and Priority Theory. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: RWS Publications. ISBN 0-9620317-6-3.[4] Trick, Michael A. (1996-11-23). "Analytic Hierarchy Process". Class Notes. Carnegie Mellon University Tepper School of Business. Retrieved 2008-03-02.[5] Meixner, Oliver; Reiner Haas (2002). Computergestützte Entscheidungs-findung: Expert Choice und AHP – innovative Werkzeuge zur Lösung komplexer Probleme (in German). Frankfurt/Wien: Redline Wirtschaft bei Ueberreuter. ISBN 3-8323-0909-8.[6] Hazelkorn, E. The Impact of League Tables and Ranking System on Higher Education Decision Making [J]. Higher Education Management and Policy, 2007, 19(2), 87-110.[7] Leslie: Trainer Assessment: A Guide to Measuring the Performance of Trainers and Facilitors, Second Edition, Gower Publishing Limited, 2002.[8] Aguaron J, Moreno-Jimenea J M. Local stability intervals in the analytic hierarchy process. European Journal of Operational Research. 2000Letter to the Chief Financial Officer, Mr. Alpha Chiang. February 1th, 2016.I am writing this letter to introduce our optimal investment strategy. Before I describe our model, I want to discuss our proposed concept of a return-on-investment (ROI). And then I will describe the optimal investment model by construct two sub-model, namely AHP model and ROI model. Finally, the major results of the model simulation will be showed up to you.Considering that the Goodgrant Foundation aims to help improve educational performance of undergraduates attending colleges and universities in the US, we interpret return-on-investment as the increased income of undergraduates. Because the income of an undergraduate is generally much higher than a high school graduate, we suggest all the investment be used to pay for the tuition and fees. In that case, if we take both the income of undergraduates’ income and dropout rate into account, we can get the return-in-investment value.Our model begins with the production of an optimized and prioritized candidate list of schools you are recommending for investment. This sorted list of school is constructed through the use of specification that you would be fully qualified to provided, such as the score of school, the income of graduate student, the dropout rate, etc. With this information, a precise investment list of schools will be produced for donation select.Furthermore, we developed the second sub-model, ROI model, which identifies the investment amount of each school per year. If we invest more money in a school, more students will have a chance to go to college. However, there is an optimal investment amount of specific school because of the existence of dropout. So, we can identify every candidate school’s in vestment amount by solve a nonlinear programming problem. Ultimately, the result of the model simulation show that Washington University, New York University and Boston College are three schools that worth investing most. And detailed simulation can be seen in our MCM Contest article.We hope that this model is sufficient in meeting your needs in any further donation and future philanthropic educational investments within the United States.。
美赛论文模版
摘要：第一段：写论文解决什么问题1．问题的重述a. 介绍重点词开头：例1：“Hand move” irrigation, a cheap but labor-intensive system used on small farms, consists of a movable pipe with sprinkler on top that can be attached to a stationary main.例2:……is a real-life common phenomenon with many complexi t ies.例3：An (effective plan) is crucial to………b. 直接指出问题：例1：We find the optimal number of tollbooths in a highway toll-plaza for a given number of highway lanes: the number of tollbooths that minimizes average delay experienced by cars.例2：A brand-new university needs to balance the cost of information technology security measures wi t h the potential cost of attacks on its systems.例3：We determine the number of sprinklers to use by analyzing the energy and motion of water in the pipe and examining the engineering parameters of sprinklers available in the market.例4: After mathematically analyzing the …… problem, our modeling group would like to present our conclusions, strategies, (and recommendations )to the …….例5：Our goal is... that (mini mizes the time )……….2．解决这个问题的伟大意义反面说明。
美赛金奖论文
1
Team # 14604
Catalogue
Abstracts ........................................................................................................................................... 1 Contents ............................................................................................................................................ 3 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 3 1.1 Restatement of the Problem ................................................................................................ 3 1.2 Survey of the Previous Research......................................................................................... 3 2. Assumptions .................................................................................................................................. 4 3. Parameters ..................................................................................................................................... 4 4. Model A ----------Package model .................................................................................................. 6 4.1 Motivation ........................................................................................................................... 6 4.2 Development ....................................................................................................................... 6 4.2.1 Module 1: Introduce of model A .............................................................................. 6 4.2.2 Module 2: Solution of model A .............................................................................. 10 4.3 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 11 5. Model B----------Optional model ................................................................................................ 12 5.1 Motivation ......................................................................................................................... 12 5.2 Development ..................................................................................................................... 12 5.2.1 Module B: Choose oar- powered rubber rafts or motorized boats either ............... 12 5.2.2 Module 2: Choose mix of oar- powered rubber rafts and motorized boats ............ 14 5.3 Initial arrangement ............................................................................................................ 17 5.4. Deepened model B ........................................................................................................... 18 5.4.1 Choose the campsites allodium .............................................................................. 18 5.4.2 Choose the oar- powered rubber rafts or motorized boats allodium ...................... 19 5.5 An example of reasonable arrangement ............................................................................ 19 5.6 The strengths and weakness .............................................................................................. 20 6. Extensions ................................................................................................................................... 21 7. Memo .......................................................................................................................................... 25 8. References ................................................................................................................................... 26 9. Appendices .................................................................................................................................. 27 9.1 Appendix I .................................................................................................. 27 9.2 Appendix II ....................................................................................................................... 29
美国数学建模竞赛优秀论文阅读报告
2.优秀论文一具体要求：1月28日上午汇报1）论文主要内容、具体模型和求解算法（针对摘要和全文进行概括）；In the part1, we will design a schedule with fixed trip dates and types and also routes. In the part2, we design a schedule with fixed trip dates and types but unrestrained routes.In the part3, we design a schedule with fixed trip dates but unrestrained types and routes.In part 1, passengers have to travel along the rigid route set by river agency, so the problem should be to come up with the schedule to arrange for the maximum number of trips without occurrence of two different trips occupying the same campsite on the same day.In part 2, passengers have the freedom to choose which campsites to stop at, therefore the mathematical description of their actions inevitably involve randomness and probability, and we actually use a probability model. The next campsite passengers choose at a current given campsite is subject to a certain distribution, and we describe events of two trips occupying the same campsite y probability. Note in probability model it is no longer appropriate to say that two trips do not meet at a campsite with certainty; instead, we regard events as impossible if their probabilities are below an adequately small number. Then we try to find the optimal schedule.In part 3, passengers have the freedom to choose both the type and route of the trip; therefore a probability model is also necessary. We continue to adopt the probability description as in part 2 and then try to find the optimal schedule.In part 1, we find the schedule of trips with fixed dates, types (propulsion and duration) and routes (which campsites the trip stops at), and to achieve this we use a rather novel method. The key idea is to divide campsites into different “orbits”that only allows some certain trip types to travel in, therefore the problem turns into several separate small problem to allocate fewer trip types, and the discussion of orbits allowing one, two, three trip types lead to general result which can deal with any value of Y. Particularly, we let Y=150, a rather realistic number of campsites, to demonstrate a concrete schedule and the carrying capacity of the river is 2340 trips.In part 2, we find the schedule of trips with fixed dates, types but unrestrained routes. To better describe the behavior of tourists, we need to use a stochastic model（随机模型）. We assume a classical probability model and also use the upper limit value of small probability to define an event as not happening. Then we use Greedy algorithm to choose the trips added and recursive algorithm together with Jordan Formula to calculate the probability of two trips simultaneously occupying the same campsites. The carrying capacity of the river by this method is 500 trips. This method can easily find theoptimal schedule with X given trips, no matter these X trips are with fixed routes or not. In part 3, we find the optimal schedule of trips with fixed dates and unrestrained types and routes. This is based on the probability model developed in part 2 and we assign the choice of trip types of the tourists with a uniform distribution to describe their freedom to choose and obtain the results similar to part 2. The carrying capacity of the river by this method is 493 trips. Also this method can easily find the optimal schedule with X given trips, no matter these X trips are with fixed routes or not.2）论文结构概述（列出提纲，分析优缺点，自己安排的结构）；1 Introduction2 Definitions3 Specific formulation of problem4 Assumptions5 Part 1 Best schedule of trips with fixed dates, types and also routes.5.1 Method5.1.1 Motivation and justification5.1.2 Key ideas5.2 Development of the model5.2.1Every campsite set for every single trip type5.2.2 Every campsite set for every multiple trip types5.2.3One campsite set for all trip types6 Part 2 Best schedule of trips with fixed dates and types, but unrestrained routes.6.1 Method6.1.1 Motivation and justification6.1.2 Key ideas6.2 Development of the model6.2.1 Calculation of p(T,x,t)6.2.2 Best schedule using Greedy algorithm6.2.3 Application to situation where X trips are given7 Part 3 Best schedule of trips with fixed dates, but unrestrained types and routes.7.1 Method7.1.1 Motivation and justification7.1.2 Key ideas7.2 Development of the model8 Testing of the model----Sensitivity analysis8.1Stability with varying trip types chosen in 68.2The sensitivity analysis of the assumption 4④8.3 The sensitivity analysis of the assumption 4⑥9 Evaluation of the model9.1 Strengths and weaknesses9.1.1 Strengths9.1.2 Weakness9.2 Further discussion10 Conclusions11 References12 Letter to the river managers3）论文中出现的好词好句（做好记录）；用于问题的转化We regard the carrying capacity of the river as the maximum total number of trips available each year, hence turning the task of the river managers into looking for the best schedule itself.表明我们在文中所做的工作We have examined many policies for different river…..问题的分解We mainly divide the problem into three parts and come up with three different….对我们工作的要求：Given the above considerations, we want to find the optimal。
美赛一等奖论文-中文翻译版
目录问题回顾 (3)问题分析： (4)模型假设： (6)符号定义 (7)4.1---------- (8)4.2 有热水输入的温度变化模型 (17)4.2.1模型假设与定义 (17)4.2.2 模型的建立The establishment of the model (18)4.2.3 模型求解 (19)4.3 有人存在的温度变化模型Temperature model of human presence (21)4.3.1 模型影响因素的讨论Discussion influencing factors of the model (21)4.3.2模型的建立 (25)4.3.3 Solving model (29)5.1 优化目标的确定 (29)5.2 约束条件的确定 (31)5.3模型的求解 (32)5.4 泡泡剂的影响 (35)5.5 灵敏度的分析 (35)8 non-technical explanation of the bathtub (37)Sｕmｍary人们经常在充满热水的浴缸里得到清洁和放松。
本文针对只有一个简单的热水龙头的浴缸，建立一个多目标优化模型，通过调整水龙头流量大小和流入水的温度来使整个泡澡过程浴缸内水温维持基本恒定且不会浪费太多水。
首先分析浴缸中水温度变化的具体情况。
根据能量转移的特点将浴缸中的热量损失分为两类情况:沿浴缸四壁和底面向空气中丧失的热量根据傅里叶导热定律求出；沿水面丧失的热量根据水由液态变为气态的焓变求出。
因涉及的参数过多,将系数进行回归分析的得到一个一元二次函数。
结合两类热量建立了温度关于时间的微分方程。
加入阻滞因子考虑环境温湿度升高对水温的影响,最后得到水温度随时间的变化规律(见图＊*)。
优化模型考虑保持水龙头匀速流入热水的情况。
将过程分为浴缸未加满和浴缸加满而水从排水口溢出的两种情况，根据能量守恒定律优化上述微分方程,建立一个有热源的情况下水的温度随时间变化的分段模型，（见图*＊)接下来考虑人在浴缸中对水温的影响。
数学建模美赛一等奖优秀专业论文
For office use onlyT1________________ T2________________ T3________________ T4________________ Team Control Number52888Problem ChosenAFor office use onlyF1________________F2________________F3________________F4________________Mathematical Contest in Modeling (MCM/ICM) Summary SheetSummaryIt’s pleasant t o go home to take a bath with the evenly maintained temperature of hot water throughout the bathtub. This beautiful idea, however, can not be always realized by the constantly falling water temperature. Therefore, people should continually add hot water to keep the temperature even and as close as possible to the initial temperature without wasting too much water. This paper proposes a partial differential equation of the heat conduction of the bath water temperature, and an object programming model. Based on the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS), this paper illustrates the best strategy the person in the bathtub can adopt to satisfy his desires. First, a spatiotemporal partial differential equation model of the heat conduction of the temperature of the bath water is built. According to the priority, an object programming model is established, which takes the deviation of temperature throughout the bathtub, the deviation of temperature with the initial condition, water consumption, and the times of switching faucet as the four objectives. To ensure the top priority objective—homogenization of temperature, the discretization method of the Partial Differential Equation model (PDE) and the analytical analysis are conducted. The simulation and analytical results all imply that the top priority strategy is: The proper motions of the person making the temperature well-distributed throughout the bathtub. Therefore, the Partial Differential Equation model (PDE) can be simplified to the ordinary differential equation model.Second, the weights for the remaining three objectives are determined based on the tolerance of temperature and the hobby of the person by applying Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS). Therefore, the evaluation model of the synthesis score of the strategy is proposed to determine the best one the person in the bathtub can adopt. For example, keeping the temperature as close as the initial condition results in the fewer number of switching faucet while attention to water consumption gives rise to the more number. Third, the paper conducts the analysis of the diverse parameters in the model to determine the best strategy, respectively, by controlling the other parameters constantly, and adjusting the parameters of the volume, shape of the bathtub and the shape, volume, temperature and the motions and other parameters of the person in turns. All results indicate that the differential model and the evaluation model developed in this paper depends upon the parameters therein. When considering the usage of a bubble bath additive, it is equal to be the obstruction between water and air. Our results show that this strategy can reduce the dropping rate of the temperatureeffectively, and require fewer number of switching.The surface area and heat transfer coefficient can be increased because of the motions of the person in the bathtub. Therefore, the deterministic model can be improved as a stochastic one. With the above evaluation model, this paper present the stochastic optimization model to determine the best strategy. Taking the disparity from the initial temperature as the suboptimum objectives, the result of the model reveals that it is very difficult to keep the temperature constant even wasting plentiful hot water in reality.Finally, the paper performs sensitivity analysis of parameters. The result shows that the shape and the volume of the tub, different hobbies of people will influence the strategies significantly. Meanwhile, combine with the conclusion of the paper, we provide a one-page non-technical explanation for users of the bathtub.Fall in love with your bathtubAbstractIt’s pleasant t o go home to take a bath with the evenly maintained temperature of hot water throughout the bathtub. This beautiful idea, however, can not be always realized by the constantly falling water temperature. Therefore, people should continually add hot water to keep the temperature even and as close as possible to the initial temperature without wasting too much water. This paper proposes a partial differential equation of the heat conduction of the bath water temperature, and an object programming model. Based on the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS), this paper illustrates the best strategy the person in the bathtub can adopt to satisfy his desires. First, a spatiotemporal partial differential equation model of the heat conduction of the temperature of the bath water is built. According to the priority, an object programming model is established, which takes the deviation of temperature throughout the bathtub, the deviation of temperature with the initial condition, water consumption, and the times of switching faucet as the four objectives. To ensure the top priority objective—homogenization of temperature, the discretization method of the Partial Differential Equation model (PDE) and the analytical analysis are conducted. The simulation and analytical results all imply that the top priority strategy is: The proper motions of the person making the temperature well-distributed throughout the bathtub. Therefore, the Partial Differential Equation model (PDE) can be simplified to the ordinary differential equation model.Second, the weights for the remaining three objectives are determined based on the tolerance of temperature and the hobby of the person by applying Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS). Therefore, the evaluation model of the synthesis score of the strategy is proposed to determine the best one the person in the bathtub can adopt. For example, keeping the temperature as close as the initial condition results in the fewer number of switching faucet while attention to water consumption gives rise to the more number. Third, the paper conducts the analysis of the diverse parameters in the model to determine the best strategy, respectively, by controlling the other parameters constantly, and adjusting the parameters of the volume, shape of the bathtub and the shape, volume, temperature and the motions and other parameters of the person in turns. All results indicate that the differential model and the evaluation model developed in this paper depends upon the parameters therein. When considering the usage of a bubble bath additive, it is equal to be the obstruction between water and air. Our results show that this strategy can reduce the dropping rate of the temperature effectively, and require fewer number of switching.The surface area and heat transfer coefficient can be increased because of the motions of the person in the bathtub. Therefore, the deterministic model can be improved as a stochastic one. With the above evaluation model, this paper present the stochastic optimization model to determine the best strategy. Taking the disparity from the initial temperature as the suboptimum objectives, the result of the model reveals that it is very difficult to keep the temperature constant even wasting plentiful hotwater in reality.Finally, the paper performs sensitivity analysis of parameters. The result shows that the shape and the volume of the tub, different hobbies of people will influence the strategies significantly. Meanwhile, combine with the conclusion of the paper, we provide a one-page non-technical explanation for users of the bathtub.Keywords:Heat conduction equation; Partial Differential Equation model (PDE Model); Objective programming; Strategy; Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) Problem StatementA person fills a bathtub with hot water and settles into the bathtub to clean and relax. However, the bathtub is not a spa-style tub with a secondary hearing system, as time goes by, the temperature of water will drop. In that conditions,we need to solve several problems:(1) Develop a spatiotemporal model of the temperature of the bathtub water to determine the best strategy to keep the temperature even throughout the bathtub and as close as possible to the initial temperature without wasting too much water;(2) Determine the extent to which your strategy depends on the shape and volume of the tub, the shape/volume/temperature of the person in the bathtub, and the motions made by the person in the bathtub.(3)The influence of using b ubble to model’s results.(4)Give a one-page non-technical explanation for users that describes your strategyGeneral Assumptions1.Considering the safety factors as far as possible to save water, the upper temperature limit is set to 45 ℃;2.Considering the pleasant of taking a bath, the lower temperature limit is set to 33℃;3.The initial temperature of the bathtub is 40℃.Table 1Model Inputs and SymbolsSymbols Definition UnitT Initial temperature of the Bath water ℃℃T∞Outer circumstance temperatureT Water temperature of the bathtub at the every moment ℃t Time hx X coordinates of an arbitrary point my Y coordinates of an arbitrary point mz Z coordinates of an arbitrary point mαTotal heat transfer coefficient of the system 2（）⋅/W m K1SThe surrounding-surface area of the bathtub 2m 2S The above-surface area of water2m 1H Bathtub’s thermal conductivity/W m K ⋅（） D The thickness of the bathtub wallm 2H Convection coefficient of water2/W m K ⋅（） a Length of the bathtubm b Width of the bathtubm h Height of the bathtubm V The volume of the bathtub water3m c Specific heat capacity of water/()J kg ⋅℃ ρ Density of water3/kg m ()v t Flooding rate of hot water3/m s r TThe temperature of hot water ℃Temperature ModelBasic ModelA spatio-temporal temperature model of the bathtub water is proposed in this paper. It is a four dimensional partial differential equation with the generation and loss of heat. Therefore the model can be described as the Thermal Equation.The three-dimension coordinate system is established on a corner of the bottom of the bathtub as the original point. The length of the tub is set as the positive direction along the x axis, the width is set as the positive direction along the y axis, while the height is set as the positive direction along the z axis, as shown in figure 1.Figure 1. The three-dimension coordinate systemTemperature variation of each point in space includes three aspects: one is the natural heat dissipation of each point in space; the second is the addition of exogenous thermal energy; and the third is the loss of thermal energy . In this way , we build the Partial Differential Equation model as follows:22212222(,,,)(,,,)()f x y z t f x y z t T T T T t x y z c Vαρ-∂∂∂∂=+++∂∂∂∂ (1) Where● t refers to time;● T is the temperature of any point in the space;● 1f is the addition of exogenous thermal energy;● 2f is the loss of thermal energy.According to the requirements of the subject, as well as the preferences of people, the article proposes these following optimization objective functions. A precedence level exists among these objectives, while keeping the temperature even throughout the bathtub must be ensured.Objective 1(.1O ): keep the temperature even throughout the bathtub;22100min (,,,)(,,,)t t V V F t T x y z t dxdydz dt t T x y z t dxdydz dt ⎡⎤⎡⎤⎛⎫=-⎢⎥ ⎪⎢⎥⎢⎥⎣⎦⎝⎭⎣⎦⎰⎰⎰⎰⎰⎰⎰⎰ (2) Objective 2(.2O ): keep the temperature as close as possible to the initial temperature;[]2200min (,,,)tV F T x y z t T dxdydz dt ⎛⎫=- ⎪⎝⎭⎰⎰⎰⎰ (3) Objective 3(.3O ): do not waste too much water;()30min tF v t dt =⋅⎰ (4) Objective 4(.4O ): fewer times of switching.4min F n = (5)Since the .1O is the most crucial, we should give priority to this objective. Therefore, the highest priority strategy is given here, which is homogenization of temperature.Strategy 0 – Homogenization of T emperatureThe following three reasons are provided to prove the importance of this strategy. Reason 1-SimulationIn this case, we use grid algorithm to make discretization of the formula (1), and simulate the distribution of water temperature.(1) Without manual intervention, the distribution of water temperature as shown infigure 2. And the variance of the temperature is 0.4962. 00.20.40.60.8100.51 1.5200.5Length WidthH e i g h t 4242.54343.54444.54545.5Distribution of temperature at the length=1Distribution of temperatureat the width=1Hot water Cool waterFigure 2. Temperature profiles in three-dimension space without manual intervention(2) Adding manual intervention, the distribution of water temperature as shown infigure 3. And the variance of the temperature is 0.005. 00.5100.51 1.5200.5 Length WidthH e i g h t 44.744.7544.844.8544.944.9545Distribution of temperatureat the length=1Distribution of temperature at the width=1Hot water Cool waterFigure 3. Temperature profiles in three-dimension space with manual interventionComparing figure 2 with figure 3, it is significant that the temperature of water will be homogeneous if we add some manual intervention. Therefore, we can assumed that222222()0T T T x y zα∂∂∂++≠∂∂∂ in formula (1). Reason 2-EstimationIf the temperature of any point in the space is different, then222222()0T T T x y zα∂∂∂++≠∂∂∂ Thus, we find two points 1111(,,,)x y z t and 2222(,,,)x y z t with:11112222(,,,)(,,,)T x y z t T x y z t ≠Therefore, the objective function 1F could be estimated as follows:[]2200200001111(,,,)(,,,)(,,,)(,,,)0t t V V t T x y z t dxdydz dt t T x y z t dxdydz dt T x y z t T x y z t ⎡⎤⎡⎤⎛⎫-⎢⎥ ⎪⎢⎥⎢⎥⎣⎦⎝⎭⎣⎦≥->⎰⎰⎰⎰⎰⎰⎰⎰ (6) The formula (6) implies that some motion should be taken to make sure that the temperature can be homogeneous quickly in general and 10F =. So we can assumed that: 222222()0T T T x y zα∂∂∂++≠∂∂∂. Reason 3-Analytical analysisIt is supposed that the temperature varies only on x axis but not on the y-z plane. Then a simplified model is proposed as follows:()()()()()()()2sin 000,0,,00,000t xx x T a T A x l t l T t T l t t T x x l π⎧=+≤≤≤⎪⎪⎪==≤⎨⎪⎪=≤≤⎪⎩ (7)Then we use two ways, Fourier transformation and Laplace transformation, in solving one-dimensional heat equation [Qiming Jin 2012]. Accordingly, we get the solution:()()2222/22,1sin a t l Al x T x t e a l πππ-=- (8) Where ()0,2x ∈, 0t >, ()01|x T f t ==(assumed as a constant), 00|t T T ==.Without general assumptions, we choose three specific value of t , and gain a picture containing distribution change of temperature in one-dimension space at different time.00.20.40.60.811.2 1.4 1.6 1.8200.511.522.533.54Length T e m p e r a t u r e time=3time=5time=8Figure 4. Distribution change of temperature in one-dimension space at different timeT able 2.V ariance of temperature at different timet3 5 8 variance0.4640 0.8821 1.3541It is noticeable in Figure 4 that temperature varies sharply in one-dimensional space. Furthermore, it seems that temperature will vary more sharply in three-dimension space. Thus it is so difficult to keep temperature throughout the bathtub that we have to take some strategies.Based on the above discussion, we simplify the four dimensional partial differential equation to an ordinary differential equation. Thus, we take the first strategy that make some motion to meet the requirement of homogenization of temperature, that is 10F =.ResultsTherefore, in order to meet the objective function, water temperature at any point in the bathtub needs to be same as far as possible. We can resort to some strategies to make the temperature of bathtub water homogenized, which is (,,)x y z ∀∈∀. That is,()(),,,T x y z t T t =Given these conditions, we improve the basic model as temperature does not change with space.112213312()()()()/()p r H S dT H S T T H S T T c v T T c V V dt D μρρ∞⎡⎤=++-+-+--⎢⎥⎣⎦(9) Where● 1μis the intensity of people’s movement ;● 3H is convection between water and people;● 3S is contact area between water and people;● p T is body surface temperature;● 1V is the volume of the bathtub;● 2V is the volume of people.Where the μ refers to the intensity of people ’s movement. It is a constant. However , it is a random variable in reality, which will be taken into consideration in the following.Model T estingWe use the oval-shaped bathtub to test our model. According to the actual situation, we give initial values as follows:0.19λ=,0.03D =,20.54H =,25T ∞=,040T =00.20.40.60.8125303540Time T e m p e r a t u r eFigure 5. Basic modelThe Figure 5 shows that the temperature decreases monotonously with time. And some signs of a slowing down in the rate of decrease are evident in the picture. Reaching about two hours, the water temperature does not change basically and be closely to the room temperature. Obviously , it is in line with the actual situation, indicating the rationality of this model.ConclusionOur model is robust under reasonable conditions, as can be seen from the testing above. In order to keep the temperature even throughout the bathtub, we should take some strategies like stirring constantly while adding hot water to the tub. Most important of all, this is the necessary premise of the following question.Strategy 1 – Fully adapted to the hot water in the tubInfluence of body surface temperatureWe select a set of parameters to simulate two kinds of situation separately.The first situation is that do not involve the factor of human1122()()/H S dT H S T T cV dt D ρ∞⎡⎤=+-⎢⎥⎣⎦(10) The second situation is that involves the factor of human112213312()()()/()p H S dT H S T T H S T T c V V dt D μρ∞⎡⎤=++-+--⎢⎥⎣⎦(11) According to the actual situation, we give specific values as follows, and draw agraph of temperature of two functions.33p T =,040T =204060801001201401601803838.53939.540TimeT e m p e r a t u r eWith body Without bodyFigure 6a. Influence of body surface temperature50010001500200025003000350025303540TimeT e m p e r a t u r eWith body Without bodyCoincident pointFigure 6b. Influence of body surface temperatureThe figure 6 shows the difference between two kinds of situation in the early time (before the coincident point ), while the figure 7 implies that the influence of body surface temperature reduces as time goes by . Combing with the degree of comfort ofbath and the factor of health, we propose the second optimization strategy: Fully adapted to the hot water after getting into the bathtub.Strategy 2 –Adding water intermittentlyInfluence of adding methods of waterThere are two kinds of adding methods of water. One is the continuous; the other is the intermittent. We can use both different methods to add hot water.1122112()()()/()r H S dT H S T T c v T T c V V dt D μρρ∞⎡⎤=++-+--⎢⎥⎣⎦(12) Where r T is the temperature of the hot water.To meet .3O , we calculated the minimum water consumption by changing the flow rate of hot water. And we compared the minimum water consumptions of the continuous with the intermittent to determine which method is better.A . Adding water continuouslyAccording to the actual situation, we give specific values as follows and draw a picture of the change of temperature.040T =, 37d T =, 45r T =5001000150020002500300035003737.53838.53939.54040.5TimeT e m p e r a t u r eadd hot waterFigure 7. Adding water continuouslyIn most cases, people are used to have a bath in an hour. Thus we consumed that deadline of the bath: 3600final t =. Then we can find the best strategy in Figure 5 which is listed in Table 2.T able 3Strategy of adding water continuouslystart t final tt ∆ vr T varianceWater flow 4 min 1 hour56 min537.410m s -⨯45℃31.8410⨯0.2455 3mB . Adding water intermittentlyMaintain the values of 0T ,d T ,r T ,v , we change the form of adding water, and get another graph.5001000150020002500300035003737.53838.53939.540TimeT e m p e r a t u r et1=283(turn on)t3=2107(turn on)t2=1828(turn off)Figure 8. Adding water intermittentlyT able 4.Strategy of adding water intermittently()1t on ()2t off 3()t on vr T varianceWater flow 5 min 30 min35min537.410m s -⨯45℃33.610⨯0.2248 3mConclusionDifferent methods of adding water can influence the variance, water flow and the times of switching. Therefore, we give heights to evaluate comprehensively the methods of adding hot water on the basis of different hobbies of people. Then we build the following model:()()()2213600210213i i n t t i F T t T dtF v t dtF n -=⎧=-⎪⎪⎪=⎨⎪⎪=⎪⎩⎰∑⎰ (13) ()112233min F w F w F w F =++ (14)12123min ..510mini i t s t t t +>⎧⎨≤-≤⎩Evaluation on StrategiesFor example: Given a set of parameters, we choose different values of v and d T , and gain the results as follows.Method 1- AHPStep 1:Establish hierarchy modelFigure 9. Establish hierarchy modelStep 2: Structure judgment matrix153113511133A ⎡⎤⎢⎥⎢⎥=⎢⎥⎢⎥⎢⎥⎣⎦Step 3: Assign weight1w 2w3w 0.650.220.13Method 2-TopsisStep1 ：Create an evaluation matrix consisting of m alternatives and n criteria, with the intersection of each alternative and criteria given as ij x we therefore have a matrixStep2：The matrix ij m n x ⨯（）is then normalised to form the matrix ij m n R r ⨯=（）, using thenormalisation method21r ,1,2,,;1,2,ijij mij i x i n j m x====∑…………，Step3：Calculate the weighted normalised decision matrix()(),1,2,,ij j ij m n m nT t w r i m ⨯⨯===⋅⋅⋅where 1,1,2,,nj j jj w W Wj n ===⋅⋅⋅∑so that11njj w==∑, and j w is the original weight given to the indicator,1,2,,j v j n =⋅⋅⋅.Step 4： Determine the worst alternative ()w A and the best alternative ()b A()(){}{}()(){}{}max 1,2,,,min 1,2,,1,2,,n ,min 1,2,,,max 1,2,,1,2,,n ,w ij ij wjbijij bjA t i m j J t i m j J t j A t i m j J t i m j J tj -+-+==∈=∈====∈=∈==where, {}1,2,,J j n j +==⋅⋅⋅ associated with the criteria having a positive impact, and {}1,2,,J j n j -==⋅⋅⋅associated with the criteria having a negative impact. Step 5： Calculate the L2-distance between the target alternative i and the worst condition w A()21,1,2,,m niw ij wj j d tt i ==-=⋅⋅⋅∑and the distance between the alternative i and the best condition b A()21,1,2,,m nib ij bj j d t t i ==-=⋅⋅⋅∑where iw d and ib d are L2-norm distances from the target alternative i to the worst and best conditions, respectively .Step 6 ：Calculate the similarity to the worst condition Step 7 ： Rank the alternatives according to ()1,2,,iw s i m =⋅⋅⋅ Step 8 : Assign weight1w2w 3w 0.55 0.170.23ConclusionAHP gives height subjectively while TOPSIS gives height objectively. And the heights are decided by the hobbies of people. However, different people has different hobbies, we choose AHP to solve the following situations.Impact of parametersDifferent customers have their own hobbies. Some customers prefer enjoying in the bath, so the .2O is more important . While other customers prefer saving water, the .3O is more important. Therefore, we can solve the problem on basis of APH . 1. Customers who prefer enjoying: 20.83w =,30.17w =According to the actual situation, we give initial values as follows:13S =,11V =,2 1.4631S =,20.05V =,33p T =,110μ=Ensure other parameters unchanged, then change the values of these parameters including 1S ,1V ,2S ,2V ,d T ,1μ. So we can obtain the optimal strategies under different conditions in Table 4.T able 5.Optimal strategies under different conditions2.Customers who prefer saving: 20.17w =,30.83w =Just as the former, we give the initial values of these parameters including1S ,1V ,2S ,2V ,d T ,1μ, then change these values in turn with other parameters unchanged. So we can obtain the optimal strategies as well in these conditions.T able 6.Optimal strategies under different conditionsInfluence of bubbleUsing the bubble bath additives is equivalent to forming a barrier between the bath water and air, thereby slowing the falling velocity of water temperature. According to the reality, we give the values of some parameters and gain the results as follows:5001000150020002500300035003334353637383940TimeT e m p e r a t u r eWithour bubbleWith bubbleFigure 10. Influence of bubbleT able 7.Strategies (influence of bubble)Situation Dropping rate of temperature (the larger the number, the slower)Disparity to theinitial temperatureWater flow Times of switchingWithout bubble 802 1.4419 0.1477 4 With bubble 34499.85530.01122The Figure 10 and the Table 7 indicates that adding bubble can slow down the dropping rate of temperature effectively . It can decrease the disparity to the initial temperature and times of switching, as well as the water flow.Improved ModelIn reality , human ’s motivation in the bathtub is flexible, which means that the parameter 1μis a changeable measure. Therefore, the parameter can be regarded as a random variable, written as ()[]110,50t random μ=. Meanwhile, the surface of water will come into being ripples when people moves in the tub, which will influence the parameters like 1S and 2S . So, combining with reality , we give the range of values as follows:()[]()[]111222,1.1,1.1S t random S S S t random S S ⎧=⎪⎨=⎪⎩Combined with the above model, the improved model is given here:()[]()[]()[]11221121111222()()()/()10,50,1.1,1.1a H S dT H S T T c v T T c V V dt D t random S t random S S S t random S S μρρμ∞⎧⎡⎤=++-+--⎪⎢⎥⎣⎦⎨⎪===⎩(15)Given the values, we can get simulation diagram:050010001500200025003000350039.954040.0540.140.15TimeT e m p e r a t u r eFigure 11. Improved modelThe figure shows that the variance is small while the water flow is large, especially the variance do not equals to zero. This indicates that keeping the temperature of water is difficult though we regard .2O as the secondary objective.Sensitivity AnalysisSome parameters have a fixed value throughout our work. By varying their values, we can see their impacts.Impact of the shape of the tub0.70.80.91 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.433.23.43.63.84Superficial areaT h e t i m e sFigure 12a. Times of switching0.70.80.91 1.11.21.31.43890390039103920393039403950Superficial areaV a r i a n c eFigure 12b. V ariance of temperature0.70.80.91 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.40.190.1950.20.2050.21Superficial areaW a t e r f l o wFigure 12c. Water flowBy varying the value of some parameters, we can get the relationships between the shape of tub and the times of switching, variance of temperature, and water flow et. It is significant that the three indexes will change as the shape of the tub changes. Therefore the shape of the tub makes an obvious effect on the strategies. It is a sensitive parameter.Impact of the volume of the tub0.70.80.91 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.533.544.55VolumeT h e t i m e sFigure 13a. Times of switching。
- 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性，平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
- 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
- 3、如文档侵犯您的权益，请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间：9:00-18:30)。
注：LEO 低地球轨道MEO中地球轨道GeO 同步卫星轨道
提出一个合理的商业计划，可以使我们抓住商业机会，我们建立四个模型来分析三个替代方案（水射流，激光，卫星）和组合，然后确定是否存在一个经济上有吸引力的机会，从而设计了四种模型分析空间碎片的风险、成本、利润和预测。
首先，我们建立了利润模型基于净现值（NPV）模型，并确定三个最佳组合的替代品与定性分析：
1）考虑了三个备选方案的组合时，碎片的量是巨大的；
2）考虑了水射流和激光的结合，认为碎片的大小不太大；
3）把卫星和激光的结合当尺寸的这些碎片足够大。
其次，建立风险定性分析模型，对影响因素进行分析在每一种替代的风险，并得出一个结论，风险将逐渐下降直到达到一个稳定的数字。
在定量分析技术投入和对设备的影响投资中，我们建立了双重技术的学习曲线模型,找到
成本的变化规律与时间的变化。
然后，我们开发的差分方程预测模型预测的量在未来的四年内每年发射的飞机。
结合结果我们从预测中，我们可以确定最佳的去除选择。
最后，分析了模型的灵敏度，讨论了模型的优势和我们的模型的弱点，目前的非技术性的信，指出了未来工作。
目录
1，简介
1.1问题的背景
1.2可行方案
1.3一般的假设
1.4我们的思想的轮廓
2，我们的模型
2.1 时间---利润模型
2.1.1 模型的符号
2.1.2 模型建立
2.1.3 结果与分析
2.2 . 差分方程的预测模型
2.2.1 模型建立
2.2.2 结果分析
2.3 双因子技术-学习曲线模型2.
3.1 模型背景知识
2.3.2 模型的符号
2.3.3 模型建立
2.3.4 结果分析
2.4风险定性分析模型
2.4.1 模型背景
2.4.2 模型建立
2.4.3 结果与分析
3．在我们模型的灵敏度分析
3.1 差分方程的预测模型。
3.1.1 稳定性分析
3.1.2 敏感性分析
3.2 双因子技术学习曲线模型3.2.1 稳定性分析
3.2.2 敏感性分析
4 优点和缺点
查分方程预测模型
优点
缺点
双因子技术学习曲线模型
优点
缺点
时间---利润模型
优点
缺点
5..结论
6..未来的工作
7．参考
双赢模式：拯救地球，抓住机遇
1..简介
问题的背景
空间曾经很干净整洁。
随着航空业的发展工业，太空垃圾的数量正在迅速增长。
如今，比500000块碎片，或―太空垃圾都绕地球追踪。
他们所有的旅行的速度高达每小时17500英里，足够快的一个相对较小的轨道碎片损坏卫星或宇宙飞船。
空间碎片上升的数目增加了所有空间飞行器的潜在危险，但尤其是对国际空间站、航天飞机和其他航天器。
轨道碎片的增长
轨道碎片是任何关于地球的人造物体在轨道上不再是一个有用的功能。
这些残骸包括非功能性航天器,被遗弃了运载火箭阶段,使命达到残骸和碎片残骸。
有
超过20000块碎片大于垒球绕着地球。
有500000块碎片大理石的大小或更大。
数以百万计的有很多碎片如此之小,他们不能被跟踪。
有这么多的轨道碎片,有惊人的一些灾难性的碰撞。
1996年,一位法国卫星打和被法国火箭残骸十年前爆炸。
2009年,一颗俄罗斯的卫星相撞,摧毁了一个功能美国铱商业卫星。
碰撞增加超过2000件可追踪库存的太空垃圾碎片。
中国2007年的反卫星试验, 用一枚导弹摧毁一颗旧的气象卫星，增加了3000多件碎片。
跟踪碎片国防部保持一个高度精确的卫星地球轨道上的物体的目录，比垒大。
美国宇航局和美国国防部合作和共享的责任为特征的卫星（包括轨道碎片）环境。
美国国防部的空间监控网络跟踪离散对象小如2英寸（5厘米），直径在低地球轨道和约1码（1米）在地球同步轨道。
目前，15000正式编目对象仍在轨道上。
被跟踪的对象的总数超过21000。
虽然他们是分布在一个广阔的地区，大部分的空间碎片集中在最有用的地球轨道-LEO，MEO和GEO [ 3 ]。
图2：地球和LEO中物体的云环
虽然太空时代已经带来了许多技术，社会和对所有人类的经济利益，这些利益并没有实现消极的后果。
空间碎片所带来的风险是全球性的，需要国家和国际解决方案。
这可以最好的。
通过航天科研人员的共同努力，政策和法律制定者，在演唱会航天器制造商，运营商和保险公司，建立政策和监管解决方案，并保证为子孙后代提供一个可持续的空间环境
目前可行的方法
碎片可按大小分类。
在这方面，三大类碎片是常用的：碎片测量超过10厘米，碎片测量
在1和10厘米之间的大小和碎片测量小于1厘米。
这些碎片可以通过大量的方法，如激光，空间碎片处理器，水射流、空间网、卫星等。
在我们的论文中，我们采取三种方法作为我们的替代方案，这三种方法都是小的，基于空间的水喷气式飞机，高能激光的碎片和大型卫星的设计，以清除碎片分别。
我们需要建立一个随时间变化的模型，一个私人公司可以采用作为一个商业机会解决空间碎片问题。
该模型应该是执行以下功能：
1，确定上面提到的备选方案的最佳选择或组合。
2，估算成本、风险、收益的定量和定性的估计，以及
其他重要因素。
3，评估独立的选择以及组合方案，探索其他重要情况。
4，分析是否在经济上有吸引力的机会是存在的，或者至少提供
避免碰撞的创新的替代方案。
5，设计确定的其他关键因素考虑优化方法
一般的假设
1，空间碎片只有在LEO，MEO和GEO将考虑：虽然他们在一个广阔的地区，大部分的空间碎片是集中在最有用的地球轨道-LDO，MEO和GEO。
2，该公司有足够的业务数量在一段时间内:取消活动紧急因为大量的巨大的伤害
的空间碎片,在当前阶段公司没有竞争对手
3，空间碎片的分布是一致的:太空碎片的位置是随机的。
因为太空碎片已经存在的空间
很长一段时间,其分布趋于均匀。
4，空间碎片的数量和解体飞机的数量线性相关性:飞机的解体将随机生成不同数量的碎片,我们假设所产生的碎片的数量每架飞机的解体是相同的
5，固定收益率是一个稳定的在一段时间内:速度根据历史上类似的项目,它不会随
在短期内变化。
6，本公司有能力同时使用三个备选方案清除空间碎片，每一种选择都不会打扰别人：如果三种替代方案可以相互干扰，分析将是非常困难的
7，运行另一个一个的时间，包括准备时间和工作时间:将准备时间到总时间使模型中
工作更容易解决。
8，运行一个替代的时间是稳定的，这可以被看作是一个周期时间t：一个替代的运行时间的模型也可以改变复杂的，我们做的假设，以简化模型。
9，risk-profit率和pre-fixed成本是线性关系:假设符合实际情况,risk-profit率的投资公司
大约是4%到4.5%,pre-fixed成本越高,risk-profit率越大。
我们的思想概述
2，我们的模型时间利润模型。