Planning for floods Personal proposal by Per-Arne Andersen D1 · Spring 2027 https://thesis.uya.no/proposals/plan-for-the-unexpected/ Allocate emergency teams to flood incidents when roads close or information arrives late. TECHNICAL - Build a dispatch board with constraint explanations and logged overrides. - Compare priority-constrained matching with priority-then-nearest allocation; keep first-come-first-served as a secondary reference. DATA (planned) 20 flood scenarios; seeds 1–20 10×10 grid, 20 incidents, 5 teams, 10 blocked edges; close 5 more edges at minute 120 of a 4-hour exercise. Include arrival, priority and service duration. METHOD Replay identical revealed events; count unserved incidents by priority, response time and reroutes. Six preparedness-experienced participants revise 4 disjoint cases across modes; record correction time, omissions and override reasons. OUTPUT Scenario generator, planning map and paired comparison. BACHELOR Task: Build a flood-response planning screen using a fixed nearest-feasible assignment rule. Data: 20 flood scenarios; seeds 1–20 (planned) 10×10 grid, 20 incidents, 5 teams, 10 blocked edges; close 5 more edges at minute 120 of a 4-hour exercise. Include arrival, priority and service duration. Requires: Recruit preparedness staff or experienced volunteers and a scenario reviewer; report the actual participant roles. Method: Use the synthetic roads, requests and crews; test reachability and capacity, then run coordinator walkthroughs. Plan 4 participant sessions. Output: A planning prototype and a list of workflow improvements. Use relevant literature to justify the established approach; a new research contribution is not the aim of this proposal. MASTER Investigate whether priority-constrained allocation remains useful after a road closure. Compare fair priority-nearest and constrained matching on identical events; analyse feasible coverage before travel and how coordinators interpret replanning. Intended contribution: Design knowledge about priority preservation and explainable replanning under disruption. STARTING PAPERS Vessey & Galletta (1991) — Cognitive Fit: https://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/10.1287/isre.2.1.63 Test whether a representation helps one kind of task more than another. Wang & Strong (1996) — Beyond Accuracy: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/07421222.1996.11518099 Distinguish accuracy, completeness, representation and fitness for the task. Search Scopus or Web of Science and ACM Digital Library using the topic query, then follow citations to the thesis start date. Record searches and compare methods, data, findings and limitations in literature-matrix.csv. Use that review to confirm or revise the gap and choose a current comparator. The linked papers are starting points. START HERE Tools: Python, NetworkX, OR-Tools, Streamlit 1. Generate one connected road grid and check reachability after removing blocked edges. 2. Write one feasible manual allocation, then implement first-come-first-served with the same travel constraints. 3. Replay seed 1 with the planned closure and validate response-time calculations before comparing planners. Literature search: emergency resource allocation decision support uncertainty Study controls: - Maximise priority-respecting assignments before minimising travel; fix ongoing services and use identical rerouting rules. - Count unreachable incidents separately; do not compare only successfully served incidents without reporting omissions. - Before collecting participant data, agree consent, storage and withdrawal handling with the supervisor. Use participant codes, not names, in study files. - Separate silent timed tasks from retrospective interviews. Timing during think-aloud sessions is descriptive, not an isolated interface-speed effect. - For the master’s study, use the research task above to define the factors and comparisons in this pilot plan. Preregister one primary outcome and feasible scope after the literature review; do not add every possible model or interface variant. REQUIRES Recruit preparedness staff or experienced volunteers and a scenario reviewer; report the actual participant roles. -------------------- NON-TECHNICAL - Prepare paper maps with incidents, teams and blocked roads. - Run tabletop planning sessions and introduce the same road closure halfway through. DATA (planned) 4 fictional flood maps + 6 preparedness staff Each map has 10 incidents and 3 teams; one deliberately omits incident timing. Collect allocation sheets and recorded reasoning. METHOD Scenario-based interviews; compare resource choices before/after the closure. Code missing information, priority conflicts and responsibility. OUTPUT Decision log and concrete requirements for a flood-planning tool. BACHELOR Task: Map the information a response coordinator needs to allocate a crew. Data: 4 fictional flood maps (planned) Each map has 10 incidents and 3 teams; one deliberately omits incident timing. Collect allocation sheets and recorded reasoning. Requires: Recruit municipal preparedness staff. Method: Use the paper flood scenarios in 4 interviews; document missing information, hand-offs and escalation points. Output: A coordination workflow and requirements checklist. Use relevant literature to justify the established approach; a new research contribution is not the aim of this proposal. MASTER Explain why crews and coordinators prioritise the same flood requests differently. Analyse incomplete information and role expectations across matched disruption scenarios, retaining conflicting cases. Intended contribution: An explanation of coordination breakdowns and requirements tied to the underlying causes. STARTING PAPERS Orlikowski & Gash (1994) — Technological Frames: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/196734.196745 Compare how roles interpret the purpose, operation and use of the same system. Wang & Strong (1996) — Beyond Accuracy: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/07421222.1996.11518099 Distinguish accuracy, completeness, representation and fitness for the task. Search Scopus or Web of Science and ACM Digital Library using the topic query, then follow citations to the thesis start date. Record searches and compare methods, data, findings and limitations in literature-matrix.csv. Use that review to confirm or revise the gap and choose a current comparator. The linked papers are starting points. START HERE Tools: LibreOffice Writer/Calc, audio recorder with consent; no programming required. 1. Prepare a pilot with 2 examples from: 4 fictional flood maps + 6 preparedness staff. Write the task questions and a reference answer sheet. 2. Write a recruitment message, information sheet and consent form for the participants named above. Agree privacy handling with the supervisor before contact. 3. Pilot one session after approval; revise unclear questions, freeze the task sets and coding categories, then recruit the planned sample. Literature search: emergency resource allocation decision support uncertainty qualitative scenario study Study controls: - Before collecting participant data, agree consent, storage and withdrawal handling with the supervisor. Use participant codes, not names, in study files. - Pilot separately, then freeze the questions and coding plan. Check objective answer keys independently; keep an audit trail of coding, including disagreements. - For comparisons, counterbalance order and case assignment; do not show a person both versions of one case. Report participant-level findings, not repeated tasks as independent people. REQUIRES Recruit 6 municipal preparedness staff. Bachelor: apply established methods and evaluate a practical solution or study. Master: position a research question in current scientific literature, investigate a mechanism or unresolved problem, and explain the contribution. Final scope is agreed with me. Study sizes are proposed; participant recruitment and planned materials are not already arranged.