五一数学建模2016年-C题-中文版

数学模型课程期末大作业题要求:1）该类题目大部分为优划问题，有一些差分方程，微分方程问题，要求提交一篇完整格式的建模论文，文字使用小四号宋体，公式用word的公式编辑器编写，正文中不得出现程序以及程序冗长的输出结果，程序以附录形式附在论文的后面，若为规划求解必须用lingo集合形式编程，其它可用Matlab或Mathmatica编写。

2）论文以纸质文档提交，同时要交一份文章和程序电子文档，由班长统一收上来，我要验证程序。

问题1某厂拥有4台磨床，2台立式钻床，3台卧式钻床，一台镗床和一台刨床，用以生产7种产品，记作p1至p7。

工厂收益规定作产品售价减去原材料费用之余。

每种产品单件的收益及所需各机床的加工工时（以小时计）列于下表（表1）：表到6月底每种产品有存货50件。

工厂每周工作6天，每天2班，每班8小时。

不需要考虑排队等待加工的问题。

在工厂计划问题中，各台机床的停工维修不是规定了月份，而是选择最合适的月份维修。

除了磨床外，每月机床在这6个月中的一个月中必须停工维修；6个月中4台磨床只有2台需要维修。

扩展工厂计划模型，以使可作上述灵活安排维修时间的决策。

停工时间的这种灵活性价值若何？注意，可假设每月仅有24个工作日。

问题2：在某给定区域内均匀分布若干个几何形状相同的小区域（小区域为边长a的正三角形）。

在每个区域中心安排一个寻呼台，管理部门将拿出一贯频域区间由于安排这些寻呼台，这个频域区间被规则地分成若干频域区间，分别被依次标号为：1、2、3、……，每一个寻呼台被分配给一个具有标号的频率小区间，只要不相互干扰，标号相同的频域小区间可以被分配多个寻呼台使用，为了避免干扰，在安排过程中，应满足以下要求：1）、距离为2a以内的两个寻呼台的编号至少必须相差2，在4a以内的寻呼台编号不能相同；2）、除1）以外并考虑三角形区域在三个方向任意延伸的情况；3）、除条件1），2）外，但要求距离在2a以内的寻呼台编号至少相差R，此时能够得到什么结果？请你在上述各种情况条件下建立数学模型，确立需要的频域区间的最小长度，即要求给出各种不同分配方案中所使用的最大编号达到最小。

Contents1.Introduction (1)1.1 Background (1)1.2 Foundation & ROI (1)2 Task (1)3 Fundamental assumptions (2)4 Definitions and Notations (2)5 Models (3)5.1 Filter data (3)5.2 Object Selection Model (Grey Relational Analysis) (4)5.2.1 Model analysis (4)5.2.2 Model solution (4)5.3 ROI Model (Principal Component Analysis) (5)5.3.1 Model analysis (5)5.3.2 Model solution (6)5.4 Verify the possibility (9)5.4.1 Comparison (9)5.4.2 External factor (10)5.5 Investment Forecast Model (11)5.5.1 Linear Regression Forecasting Model (11)5.5.2 School potential Prediction (TOPSIS) (12)5.5.3 Final investment (TOPSIS) (13)6 Conclusions (16)7 Strengths and Weaknesses (18)7.1 Strengths (19)7.2 Weaknesses (20)8 Letter to Mr. Alpha Chiang (21)9 References (22)Team # 44952 Page 1 of 221 Introduction1.1 BackgroundThe Goodgrant Foundation is a charitable organization that wants to help improve educational performance of undergraduates attending colleges and universities in the United States. To do this, the foundation intends to donate a total of $100,000,000 (US100 million) to an appropriate group of schools per year, for five years, starting July 2016. In doing so, they do not want to duplicate the investments and focus of other large grant organizations such as the Gates Foundation and Lumina Foundation.Our team has been asked by the Goodgrant Foundation to develop a model to determine an optimal investment strategy that identifies the schools, the investment amount per school, the return on that investment, and the time duration that the organi zation’s money should be provided to have the highest likelihood of producing a strong positive effect on student performance. This strategy should contain a 1 to N optimized and prioritized candidate list of schools you are recommending for investment bas ed on each candidate school’s demonstrated potential for effective use of private funding, and an estimated return on investment (ROI) defined in a manner appropriate for a charitable organization such as the Goodgrant Foundation.1.2 Foundation & ROIFoundation (charitable foundation) refers to the nonprofit legal person who uses the property of the natural persons, legal persons or other organizations to engage in public welfare undertakings. In terms of its nature, foundation is a kind of folk non-profit organizations.ROI is a performance measure used to evaluate the efficiency of an investment or to compare the efficiency of a number of different investments. ROI measures the amount of return on an investment relative to the investment’s cost. To calculate ROI, the benefit (or return) of an investment is divided by the cost of the investment, and the result is expressed as a percentage or a ratio.2 Task●One-page summary for our MCM submission●Using our models to achieve the candidate list of schools●Calculate the time durati on that the organization’s money should be provided to have thehighest likelihood of producing a strong positive effect on student performance●Calculate the investment amount Goodgrant Foundation would pay for each school●Calculate the ROI of the Goodgrant Foundation●Forecast the development of this kind of investment mode●Write a letter to the CFO of the Goodgrant Foundation, Mr. Alpha Chiang, that describesthe optimal investment strategy。

191])()([),(20200y y x x r z y x z -+--=c y b x a y x y x z +⋅+⋅++=22),(4753⨯41i D i D 20.000160.001162021421339915152112032534791410.1 6660.1 2.5 2.666.11212.12525.16060.1/mcm05/probX 53⨯47Y 53⨯47k n m Z ⨯53⨯47 k n m Z ⨯~53⨯47i n m k H ⨯m m n k n 21n +120i n m k S ⨯i D126 18319719141164512X Y⎪⎪⎪⎭⎫ ⎝⎛=⨯⨯⨯⨯⨯⨯47532531534712111..................x x x x x x X ⎪⎪⎪⎭⎫⎝⎛⨯⨯⨯⨯⨯⨯47532531534712111..................y y y y y y),(y x Z =mnk ⎪⎪⎪⎭⎫⎝⎛⨯⨯⨯⨯⨯⨯⨯⨯⨯⨯⨯⨯),(...),,(),,(............),(...),,(),,(4753475325325315315347147121211111y x f y x f y x f y x f y x f y x f ⎪⎪⎪⎭⎫⎝⎛⨯⨯⨯⨯⨯⨯47532531534712111..................Z Z Z Z Z Z 1=imnk Z ~⎪⎪⎪⎪⎭⎫ ⎝⎛⨯⨯⨯⨯⨯⨯47532531534712111~...~~............~...~~Z Z Z Z Z Z i imnkH ∆mnk Z i mnk Z ~⎪⎪⎪⎭⎫⎝⎛⨯⨯⨯⨯⨯⨯ii i i i i h h h h h h 47532531534712111............... (2)i mnkS∆∑∑=⨯=⨯4712531)(47531j i ji i hi D ∆∑=16411641i mnk S 4i i imnk H 5347imnk S mnk H i D 41 2),(y x Z = ),(y x Z =i D nk m ⨯ i mnk H mnk Z i mnk Z ~1~mnk Z 2~mnk Z 1mnk H 2mnk H imnkS∆∑∑=⨯=⨯4712531)(47531j ij i i h1mnk S 2mnk S⑤ 用i D ∆∑=16411641i mnk S 计算出1D 与2D ，则1D 和2D 的值较小者为最优方案.3 主要程序及结论通过数据处理与分析我们认为预测方法一比预测方法二好.所得计算结果值分别为：（1）不同时段的两种方法的实测与预测值的均方差：1mnkS =[0.9247218269e-1, .165797962696, 0.9247218269e-1,0.9247218269e-1, .2586806182, .2586806182, .2586806182, 2.791713932, .2474029514, .2539943168, .2715902174, .2715902174182, .2586806182, 2.791713932, .2474029514, .2539943168, .2715902174]2mnkS := [0.921412432e-1, .1098068392, 0.2234955063e-1,0.1592933205e-1, .2851304286, .2851304286, .2851304286, 2.792910527, .2612701098, .2381007694, .2613774987, 0.5183032655e-1,.2851304286,2.792810527, .2612701098, .2381007694, .2613774987] （2） 方法一的均方差为：1D := .8311398371方案二的均方差： 2D = .8417760978得1D <2D .主要程序与运行结果为： （1） 局域曲面拟合程序> solve({0.3=0.6-r*(0.045^2+0.042^2)},{r});> z1:=0.6-79.17656374*[(x-120.2500)^2+(y-33.7667)^2];> z2:=0.6-79.17656374*[(x-120.2500)^2+(y-33.7667)^2];> z3:=0.6-79.17656374*[(x-120.2500)^2+(y-33.7667)^2];> z4:=0.6-79.17656374*[(x-120.2500)^2+(y-33.7667)^2];> solve({0.15=0.3-r*(0.045^2+0.042^2)},{r});> z4:=0.3-39.58828187*[(x-118.1833)^2+(y-31.0833)^2];> solve({5.1=10.2-r*(0.045^2+0.042^2)},{r});> z1:=10.2-1346.001584*[(x-120.3167)^2+(y-31.5833)^2];> z2:=10.2-1346.001584*[(x-120.3167)^2+(y-31.5833)^2];> z3:=10.2-1346.001584*[(x-120.3167)^2+(y-31.5833)^2];> z4:=10.2-1346.001584*[(x-120.3167)^2+(y-31.5833)^2];> solve({0.1=0.2-r*(0.045^2+0.042^2)},{r});> z4:=0.2-26.39218791*[(x-118.4000)^2+(y-30.6833)^2];>z4:=solve({118.9833^2+30.6167^2+a*118.9833+b*30.6167+c=0.7000,118.5833^ 2+30.0833^2+a*118.5833+b*30.0833+c=1.8000,119.4167^2+30.8833^2+a*119.41 67+b*30.8833+c=0.5});> solve({0.05=0.1-r*(0.045^2+0.042^2)},{r});> z1:=0.1-13.19609396*[(x-119.4167)^2+(y-30.8833)^2];>> solve({2.9=5.8-r*(0.045^2+0.042^2)},{r});> z4:=0.1-765.3734495*[(x-118.2833)^2+(y-29.7167)^2];（2）均方差求值程序：>sq1:=[0.09247218269,0.165797962696,0.09247218269,0.09247218269,0.258680 6182,0.2586806182,0.2586806182,2.791713932,0.2474029514,0.2539943168,0. 2715902174,0.2715902174182,0.2586806182,2.791713932,0.2474029514,0.2539 943168,0.2715902174];> sum1:=add(i,i=sq1);> ave1:=sum1/17;>ve1:=[.5222900020,.5222900020,.5222900020,.5222900020,.5222900020,.5222 900020,.5222900020,.5222900020,.5222900020,.5222900020,.5222900020,.522 2900020,.5222900020,.5222900020,.5222900020,.5222900020,.5222900020,.52 22900020];>sq2:=[0.0921412432,0.1098068392,0.022********,0.01592933205,0.285130428 6,0.2851304286,0.2851304286,2.792910527,0.2612701098,0.2381007694,0.261 3774987,0.0518*******,0.2851304286,2.792810527,0.2612701098,0.238100769 4,0.2613774987];（2）数据模拟图程序：> with(linalg):> l:=matrix(91,7,[58138,32.9833,118.5167, 0.0000, 5.0000, 0.2000, 0.0000, 58139, 33.3000,118.8500, 0.0000, 3.9000, 0.0000, 0.0000,58141, 33.6667,119.2667, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000,58143, 33.8000,119.8000, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000,58146, 33.4833,119.8167, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000,58147, 33.0333,119.0333, 0.0000, 6.0000, 1.4000, 0.0000,58148, 33.2333,119.3000, 0.0000, 1.1000, 0.3000, 0.0000,58150, 33.7667,120.2500, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.1000,58154, 33.3833,120.1500, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000,58158, 33.2000,120.4833, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000,58230, 32.1000,118.2667, 3.3000,20.7000, 6.6000, 0.0000,58236, 32.3000,118.3000, 0.0000, 8.2000, 3.6000, 1.4000,58238, 32.0000,118.8000, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000,58240, 32.6833,119.0167, 0.0000, 3.0000, 1.4000, 0.0000,58241, 32.8000,119.4500, 0.1000, 1.4000, 1.5000, 0.1000,58243, 32.9333,119.8333, 0.0000, 0.7000, 0.4000, 0.0000,58245, 32.4167,119.4167, 0.3000, 2.7000, 3.8000, 0.0000,58246, 32.3333,119.9333, 7.9000, 2.7000, 0.1000, 0.0000,58249, 32.2000,120.0000,12.3000, 2.4000, 5.6000, 0.0000,58251, 32.8667,120.3167, 5.2000, 0.1000, 0.0000, 0.0000, 58252, 32.1833,119.4667, 0.4000, 3.2000, 4.8000, 0.0000, 58254, 32.5333,120.4500, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000, 58255, 32.3833,120.5667, 1.1000,18.5000, 0.5000, 0.0000, 58264, 32.3333,121.1833,35.4000, 0.1000, 0.2000, 0.0000, 58265, 32.0667,121.6000, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000, 58269, 31.8000,121.6667,31.3000, 0.7000, 2.8000, 0.1000, 58333, 31.9500,118.8500, 8.2000, 8.5000,16.9000, 0.1000, 58334, 31.3333,118.3833, 4.9000,58.1000, 9.0000, 0.1000, 58335, 31.5667,118.5000, 5.4000,26.0000,11.0000, 0.8000, 58336, 31.7000,118.5167, 3.6000,27.8000,15.3000, 0.6000, 58337, 31.0833,118.1833, 7.0000, 6.4000,15.3000, 0.2000, 58341, 31.9833,119.5833,11.5000, 5.4000,16.1000, 0.0000, 58342, 31.7500,119.5500,32.6000,37.9000, 5.8000, 0.0000, 58343, 31.7667,119.9333,20.7000,24.3000, 5.3000, 0.0000, 58344, 31.9500,119.1667,12.4000, 5.9000,16.3000, 0.0000, 58345, 31.4333,119.4833,21.8000,18.1000, 9.8000, 0.1000, 58346, 31.3667,119.8167, 0.1000,12.7000, 5.1000, 0.2000, 58349, 31.2667,120.6333, 1.1000, 5.1000, 0.0000, 0.0000, 58351, 31.8833,120.2667,22.9000,15.5000, 6.2000, 0.0000, 58352, 31.6500,120.7333,15.1000, 5.4000, 2.4000, 0.0000, 58354, 31.5833,120.3167, 0.1000,12.5000, 2.4000, 0.0000, 58356, 31.4167,120.9500, 5.1000, 4.9000, 0.4000, 0.0000, 58358, 31.0667,120.4333, 2.4000, 3.4000, 0.0000, 0.8000, 58359, 31.1500,120.6333, 1.5000, 3.8000, 0.5000, 0.1000, 58360, 31.9000,121.2000, 5.6000, 3.2000, 2.9000, 0.1000, 58361, 31.1000,121.3667, 3.5000, 0.6000, 0.2000, 0.7000, 58362, 31.4000,121.4833,33.0000, 4.1000, 0.9000, 0.0000, 58365, 31.3667,121.2500,17.7000, 2.2000, 0.1000, 0.0000, 58366, 31.6167,121.4500,75.2000, 0.4000, 1.5000, 0.0000, 58367, 31.2000,121.4333, 7.2000, 2.8000, 0.2000, 0.2000, 58369, 31.0500,121.7833, 3.2000, 0.3000, 0.0000, 0.3000, 58370, 31.2333,121.5333, 7.0000, 3.4000, 0.2000, 0.2000, 58377, 31.4667,121.1000, 7.8000, 7.2000, 0.3000, 0.0000, 58426, 30.3000,118.1333, 0.0000, 0.0000,17.6000, 6.2000, 58431, 30.8500,118.3167, 5.1000, 2.3000,16.5000, 0.1000, 58432, 30.6833,118.4000, 3.6000, 1.4000,20.5000, 0.2000, 58433, 30.9333,118.7500, 2.1000, 3.4000, 8.5000, 0.2000, 58435, 30.3000,118.5333, 0.0000, 0.0000,13.6000, 8.5000, 58436, 30.6167,118.9833, 0.0000, 0.0000, 5.3000, 0.5000, 58438, 30.0833,118.5833, 0.0000, 0.0000,27.6000,21.8000, 58441, 30.8833,119.4167, 0.1000, 1.6000, 1.6000, 1.0000, 58442, 31.1333,119.1833, 3.0000, 8.8000, 5.4000, 0.2000, 58443, 30.9833,119.8833, 0.1000, 2.7000, 0.1000, 0.9000,58446, 30.9667,119.6833, 0.0000, 0.1000, 5.1000, 2.5000, 58448, 30.2333,119.7000, 0.0000, 0.0000,15.1000, 6.9000, 58449, 30.0500,119.9500, 0.0000, 0.0000,23.5000, 8.2000, 58450, 30.8500,120.0833, 0.0000, 0.7000, 0.0000, 4.1000, 58451, 30.8500,120.9000, 0.5000, 0.1000, 0.0000, 3.8000, 58452, 30.7833,120.7333, 0.3000, 0.0000, 0.0000, 3.0000, 58453, 30.0000,120.6333, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000,18.2000, 58454, 30.5333,120.0667, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.5000, 4.9000, 58455, 30.5167,120.6833, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000, 4.6000, 58456, 30.6333,120.5333, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000, 4.2000, 58457, 30.2333,120.1667, 0.0000, 0.0000, 2.0000,12.6000, 58459, 30.2000,120.3167, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000,15.0000, 58460, 30.8833,121.1667, 1.2000, 0.1000, 0.0000, 2.3000, 58461, 31.1333,121.1167, 4.0000, 1.4000, 0.4000, 0.2000, 58462, 31.0000,121.2500, 2.7000, 0.3000, 0.4000, 1.7000, 58463, 30.9333,121.4833, 1.7000, 0.1000, 0.0000, 0.8000, 58464, 30.6167,121.0833, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000, 3.6000, 58467, 30.2667,121.2167, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000, 1.8000, 58468, 30.0667,121.1500, 0.0000, 0.1000, 5.1000, 2.5000, 58472, 30.7333,122.4500, 0.3000, 0.6000, 0.0000, 4.9000, 58477, 30.0333,122.1000, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000, 58484, 30.2500,122.1833, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000, 58530, 29.8667,118.4333, 0.0000, 0.0000,27.5000,23.6000, 58531, 29.7167,118.2833, 0.0000, 0.0000, 3.7000,11.5000, 58534, 29.7833,118.1833, 0.0000, 0.0000, 9.3000, 6.5000, 58542, 29.8167,119.6833, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000,27.6000, 58550, 29.7000,120.2500, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000, 4.9000, 58562, 29.9667,121.7500, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.9000]);> lat:=col(l,2);> lon:=col(l,3); > sd1:=col(l,4);> sd2:=col(l,5); > sd3:=col(l,6); > sd4:=col(l,7);> abc1:=seq([lat[i],lon[i],sd1[i]],i=1..91);> abc2:=seq([lat[i],lon[i],sd2[i]],i=1..91);> abc3:=seq([lat[i],lon[i],sd3[i]],i=1..91);> abc4:=seq([lat[i],lon[i],sd4[i]],i=1..91);> with(plots):> pointplot3d([abc1],color=green,axes=boxed);> surfdata([abc1],labels=["x","y","z"],axes=boxed);> with(stats):> with(fit):> with(plots):fx1:=leastsquare[[x,y,z],z=x^3+y^3+a*x^2+b*y^2+c*x*y+d*x+e*y+f,{a,b,c,d ,e,f}]([abc1]);> plot3d(fx1,x=25..35,y=119..135);> pointplot3d([abc2],color=blue,axes=boxed);> surfdata([abc2],labels=["x","y","z"],axes=boxed);>fx2:=leastsquare[[x,y,z],z=x^3+y^3+a*x^2+b*y^2+c*x*y+d*x+e*y+f,{a,b,c,d ,e,f}]([abc2]);> plot3d(fx2,x=25..35,y=119..135);> pointplot3d([abc3],color=red,axes=boxed)> surfdata([abc3],labels=["x","y","z"],axes=boxed);>fx3:=leastsquare[[x,y,z],z=x^3+y^3+a*x^2+b*y^2+c*x*y+d*x+e*y+f,{a,b,c,d ,e,f}]([abc3]);> surfdata([abc4],labels=["x","y","z"],axes=boxed);>fx4:=leastsquare[[x,y,z],z=x^3+y^3+a*x^2+b*y^2+c*x*y+d*x+e*y+f,{a,b,c,d ,e,f}]([abc4]);五.如何在评价方法中考虑公众感受的数学模型建立.1660.1 2.5 2.666.11212.12525.16060.1z } 1.00 {0≤≤=z z R } 5.21.0 {1≤≤=z z R } 66.2 {2≤≤=z z R } 121.6 {3≤≤=z z R } 251.12 {4≤≤=z z R } 601.25 {5≤≤=z z R } 1.60 {6≥=z z R 0ˆR 1ˆR 2ˆR 3ˆR 4ˆR 5ˆR 6ˆR } 1)( {ˆ000R z z z R ∈≤=，μ} 1)( {ˆ111R z z z R ∈≤=，μ} 1)( {ˆ222R z z z R ∈≤=，μ } 1)( {ˆ333R z z z R ∈≤=，μ} 1)( {ˆ444R z z z R ∈≤=，μ} 1)( {ˆ555R z z z R ∈≤=，μ } 1)( {ˆ666R z z z R ∈≤=，μ)(z i μ i 1z ∈i R i R )(z i μ i 16i R ˆ i 1 2)(z i μ i 1⎩⎨⎧≤<+-≤≤=1.006.0 , 5.22506.00, 1)(0z z z z μ)(1z μ] 2369277587.0e [2369277587.0112)3.1(----z 5.21.0≤≤z )(2z μ] 20555762126.0e [20555762126.0112)3.4(----z 66.2≤≤z)(3z μ] 2287787270.0e [2287787270.0119.5)05.9(2----z 121.6≤≤z )(4z μ] 70397557815.0e[70397557815.0119.12)55.18(2----z 251.12≤≤z)(5z μ] 00475951221.0e[00475951221.011100)55.42(2----z 601.25≤≤z)(6z μ2)]5.60(5 [11--+z 1.60≥z 74)(z i μ及iR ˆ i =0，1，…,6合并可得} 0 {≥=z z R 上的模糊集合} , 1)( {ˆR z z z R∈≤=μ.其中R 是论域,)(z μ是模糊集合R ˆ的隶属函数，由)(z i μ分段合)(z μ小雨的隶属函数图特大暴雨隶属函数图大暴雨隶属函数图暴雨隶属函数图⎪⎪⎪⎪⎩⎪⎪⎪⎪⎨⎧>≤<≤<≤<≤<≤<≤≤=60)(6025)(2512)(126)(65.2)(5.21.0)(1.00)()(6543210z z z z z z z z z z z z z z t μμμμμμμμ 5 353⨯47imnkZ ~)(z μ53⨯47=M mnk⎪⎪⎪⎭⎫⎝⎛⨯⨯⨯⨯⨯⨯47532531534712111..................μμμμμμ=M imnk~⎪⎪⎪⎭⎫⎝⎛⨯⨯⨯⨯⨯⨯47532531534712111~...~~............~...~~μμμμμμi ),(y x Z =i mnk ∏∆mnk M =M i mnk~⎪⎪⎪⎪⎭⎫ ⎝⎛⨯⨯⨯⨯⨯⨯i i i i i i 47532531534712111..................λλλλλλ 6imnkΓ∆∑∑=⨯=⨯4712531)(47531j i j i i λ i Ω∆∑=16411641i imnkΓ 8 i 2i i i mnk ∏5347imnk Γi mnk ∏i Ω411Ω2Ω 1Ω2Ω1D 2D19811999。

2001高教社杯全国大学生数学建模竞赛题目（请先阅读“对论文格式的统一要求”）C题基金使用计划某校基金会有一笔数额为M元的基金，打算将其存入银行或购买国库券。

当前银行存款及各期国库券的利率见下表。

假设国库券每年至少发行一次，发行时间不定。

取款政策参考银行的现行政策。

校基金会计划在n年内每年用部分本息奖励优秀师生，要求每年的奖金额大致相同，且在n年末仍保留原基金数额。

校基金会希望获得最佳的基金使用计划，以提高每年的奖金额。

请你帮助校基金会在如下情况下设计基金使用方案，并对M=5000万元，n=10年给出具体结果：1．只存款不购国库券；2．可存款也可购国库券。

3．学校在基金到位后的第3年要举行百年校庆，基金会希望这一年的奖金比其它年度多摘要：运用基金M分成n份（M1，M2，…，Mn），M1存一年，M2存2年，…，Mn存n 年．这样，对前面的（n－1）年，第i年终时M1到期，将Mi及其利息均取出来作为当年的奖金发放；而第n年，则用除去M元所剩下的钱作为第n年的奖金发放的基本思想，解决了基金的最佳使用方案问题．关键词：超限归纳法；排除定理；仓恩定理1问题重述某校基金会有一笔数额为M元的基金，欲将其存入银行或购买国库券．当前银行存款及各期国库券的利率见表1．假设国库券每年至少发行一次，发行时间不定．取款政策参考银行的现行政策．表1 存款年利率表校基金会计在n年内每年用部分本息奖励优秀师生，要求每年的奖金额大致相同，且在n年末仍保留原基金数额．校基金会希望获得最佳的基金使用计划，以提高每年的奖金额．需帮助校基金会在如下情况下设计基金使用方案，并对M＝5 000万元，n＝10年给出具体结果：①只存款不购国库券；②可存款也可购国库券．③学校在基金到位后的第3年要举行百年校庆，基金会希望这一年的奖金比其它年度多20％．2模型的分析、假设与建立2.1模型假设①每年发放的奖金额相同；②取款按现行银行政策；③不考虑通货膨胀及国家政策对利息结算的影响；④基金在年初到位，学校当年奖金在下一年年初发放；⑤国库券若提前支取，则按满年限的同期银行利率结算，且需交纳一定数额的手续费；⑥到期国库券回收资金不能用于购买当年发行的国库券．2.2符号约定K——发放的奖金数；ri——存i年的年利率，（i＝1／2，1，2，3，5）；Mi——支付第i年奖金，第1年开始所存的数额（i＝1，2，…，10）；U——半年活期的年利率；2.3模型的建立和求解2.3.1情况一：只存款不购国库券（1）分析令：支付各年奖金和本金存款方案———Mij （i ＝1，…，10，i ；j 属于N ）． 将各方案ij M 看成元素，构成集合A则ij M 属于A1,210;I =所以A 按I 取值分10行根据仓恩定理：分行集中，任何一单行有上界，则必包含一个极大元素。

For office use only T1T2T3T4T eam Control Number42939Problem ChosenCFor office use onlyF1F2F3F42016Mathematical Contest in Modeling(MCM)Summary Sheet (Attach a copy of this page to each copy of your solution paper.)SummaryIn order to determine the optimal donation strategy,this paper proposes a data-motivated model based on an original definition of return on investment(ROI) appropriate for charitable organizations.First,after addressing missing data,we develop a composite index,called the performance index,to quantify students’educational performance.The perfor-mance index is a linear composition of several commonly used performance indi-cators,like graduation rate and graduates’earnings.And their weights are deter-mined by principal component analysis.Next,to deal with problems caused by high-dimensional data,we employ a lin-ear model and a selection method called post-LASSO to select variables that statis-tically significantly affect the performance index and determine their effects(coef-ficients).We call them performance contributing variables.In this case,5variables are selected.Among them,tuition&fees in2010and Carnegie High-Research-Activity classification are insusceptible to donation amount.Thus we only con-sider percentage of students who receive a Pell Grant,share of students who are part-time and student-to-faculty ratio.Then,a generalized adaptive model is adopted to estimate the relation between these3variables and donation amount.Wefit the relation across all institutions and get afitted function from donation amount to values of performance contributing variables.Then we divide the impact of donation amount into2parts:homogenous and heterogenous one.The homogenous influence is modeled as the change infit-ted values of performance contributing variables over increase in donation amount, which can be predicted from thefitted curve.The heterogenous one is modeled as a tuning parameter which adjusts the homogenous influence based on deviation from thefitted curve.And their product is increase in true values of performance over increase in donation amount.Finally,we calculate ROI,defined as increase in performance index over in-crease in donation amount.This ROI is institution-specific and dependent on in-crease in donation amount.By adopting a two-step ROI maximization algorithm, we determine the optimal investment strategy.Also,we propose an extended model to handle problems caused by time dura-tion and geographical distribution of donations.A Letter to the CFO of the Goodgrant FoundationDear Chiang,Our team has proposed a performance index quantifying the students’educational per-formance of each institution and defined the return of investment(ROI)appropriately for a charitable organization like Goodgrant Foundation.A mathematical model is built to help predict the return of investment after identifying the mechanism through which the donation generates its impact on the performance.The optimal investment strategy is determined by maximizing the estimated return of investment.More specifically,the composite performance index is developed after taking all the pos-sible performance indicators into consideration,like graduation rate and graduates’earnings. The performance index is constructed to represents the performance of the school as well as the positive effect that a college brings to students and the community.From this point of view, our definition manages to capture social benefits of donation.And then we adopt a variable selection method tofind out performance contributing vari-ables,which are variables that strongly affect the performance index.Among all the perfor-mance contributing variables we select,three variables which can be directly affected by your generous donation are kept to predict ROI:percentage of students who receive a Pell Grant, share of students who are part-time and student-to-faculty ratio.Wefitted a relation between these three variables and the donation amount to predict change in value of each performance contributing variable over your donation amount.And we calculate ROI,defined as increase in the performance index over your donation amount, by multiplying change in value of each performance contributing variable over your donation amount and each performance contributing variable’s effect on performance index,and then summing up the products of all performance contributing variables.The optimal investment strategy is decided after maximizing the return of investment according to an algorithm for selection.In conclusion,our model successfully produced an investment strategy including a list of target institutions and investment amount for each institution.(The list of year1is attached at the end of the letter).The time duration for the investment could also be determined based on our model.Since the model as well as the evaluation approach is fully data-motivated with no arbitrary criterion included,it is rather adaptable for solving future philanthropic educational investment problems.We have a strong belief that our model can effectively enhance the efficiency of philan-thropic educational investment and provides an appropriate as well as feasible way to best improve the educational performance of students.UNITID names ROI donation 197027United States Merchant Marine Academy21.85%2500000 102711AVTEC-Alaska’s Institute of Technology21.26%7500000 187745Institute of American Indian and Alaska Native Culture20.99%2000000 262129New College of Florida20.69%6500000 216296Thaddeus Stevens College of Technology20.66%3000000 229832Western Texas College20.26%10000000 196158SUNY at Fredonia20.24%5500000 234155Virginia State University20.04%10000000 196200SUNY College at Potsdam19.75%5000000 178615Truman State University19.60%3000000 199120University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill19.51%3000000 101648Marion Military Institute19.48%2500000187912New Mexico Military Institute19.31%500000 227386Panola College19.28%10000000 434584Ilisagvik College19.19%4500000 199184University of North Carolina School of the Arts19.15%500000 413802East San Gabriel Valley Regional Occupational Program19.09%6000000 174251University of Minnesota-Morris19.09%8000000 159391Louisiana State University and Agricultural&Mechanical Col-19.07%8500000lege403487Wabash Valley College19.05%1500000 Yours Sincerely,Team#42939An Optimal Strategy of Donation for Educational PurposeControl Number:#42939February,2016Contents1Introduction51.1Statement of the Problem (5)1.2Baseline Model (5)1.3Detailed Definitions&Assumptions (8)1.3.1Detailed Definitions: (8)1.3.2Assumptions: (9)1.4The Advantages of Our Model (9)2Addressing the Missing Values93Determining the Performance Index103.1Performance Indicators (10)3.2Performance Index via Principal-Component Factors (10)4Identifying Performance Contributing Variables via post-LASSO115Determining Investment Strategy based on ROI135.1Fitted Curve between Performance Contributing Variables and Donation Amount145.2ROI(Return on Investment) (15)5.2.1Model of Fitted ROIs of Performance Contributing Variables fROI i (15)5.2.2Model of the tuning parameter P i (16)5.2.3Calculation of ROI (17)5.3School Selection&Investment Strategy (18)6Extended Model186.1Time Duration (18)6.2Geographical Distribution (22)7Conclusions and Discussion22 8Reference23 9Appendix241Introduction1.1Statement of the ProblemThere exists no doubt in the significance of postsecondary education to the development of society,especially with the ascending need for skilled employees capable of complex work. Nevertheless,U.S.ranks only11th in the higher education attachment worldwide,which makes thefinancial support from large charitable organizations necessary.As it’s essential for charitable organizations to maximize the effectiveness of donations,an objective and systematic assessment model is in demand to develop appropriate investment strategies.To achieve this goal,several large foundations like Gates Foundation and Lumina Foundation have developed different evaluation approaches,where they mainly focus on spe-cific indexes like attendance and graduation rate.In other empirical literature,a Forbes ap-proach(Shifrin and Chen,2015)proposes a new indicator called the Grateful Graduates Index, using the median amount of private donations per student over a10-year period to measure the return on investment.Also,performance funding indicators(Burke,2002,Cave,1997,Ser-ban and Burke,1998,Banta et al,1996),which include but are not limited to external indicators like graduates’employment rate and internal indicators like teaching quality,are one of the most prevailing methods to evaluate effectiveness of educational donations.However,those methods also arise with widely acknowledged concerns(Burke,1998).Most of them require subjective choice of indexes and are rather arbitrary than data-based.And they perform badly in a data environment where there is miscellaneous cross-section data but scarce time-series data.Besides,they lack quantified analysis in precisely predicting or measuring the social benefits and the positive effect that the investment can generate,which serves as one of the targets for the Goodgrant Foundation.In accordance with Goodgrant Foundation’s request,this paper provides a prudent def-inition of return on investment(ROI)for charitable organizations,and develops an original data-motivated model,which is feasible even faced with tangled cross-section data and absent time-series data,to determine the optimal strategy for funding.The strategy contains selection of institutions and distribution of investment across institutions,time and regions.1.2Baseline ModelOur definition of ROI is similar to its usual meaning,which is the increase in students’educational performance over the amount Goodgrant Foundation donates(assuming other donationsfixed,it’s also the increase in total donation amount).First we cope with data missingness.Then,to quantify students’educational performance, we develop an index called performance index,which is a linear composition of commonly used performance indicators.Our major task is to build a model to predict the change of this index given a distribution of Goodgrant Foundation$100m donation.However,donation does not directly affect the performance index and we would encounter endogeneity problem or neglect effects of other variables if we solely focus on the relation between performance index and donation amount. Instead,we select several variables that are pivotal in predicting the performance index from many potential candidates,and determine their coefficients/effects on the performance index. We call these variables performance contributing variables.Due to absence of time-series data,it becomes difficult tofigure out how performance con-tributing variables are affected by donation amount for each institution respectively.Instead, wefit the relation between performance contributing variables and donation amount across all institutions and get afitted function from donation amount to values of performance contribut-ing variables.Then we divide the impact of donation amount into2parts:homogenous and heteroge-nous one.The homogenous influence is modeled as the change infitted values of performance contributing variables over increase in donation amount(We call these quotientsfitted ROI of performance contributing variable).The heterogenous one is modeled as a tuning parameter, which adjusts the homogenous influence based on deviation from thefitted function.And their product is the institution-specific increase in true values of performance contributing variables over increase in donation amount(We call these values ROI of performance contributing vari-able).The next step is to calculate the ROI of the performance index by adding the products of ROIs of performance contributing variables and their coefficients on the performance index. This ROI is institution-specific and dependent on increase in donation amount.By adopting a two-step ROI maximization algorithm,we determine the optimal investment strategy.Also,we propose an extended model to handle problems caused by time duration and geographical distribution of donations.Note:we only use data from the provided excel table and that mentioned in the pdffile.Table1:Data SourceVariable DatasetPerformance index Excel tablePerformance contributing variables Excel table and pdffileDonation amount PdffileTheflow chart of the whole model is presented below in Fig1:Figure1:Flow Chart Demonstration of the Model1.3Detailed Definitions&Assumptions 1.3.1Detailed Definitions:1.3.2Assumptions:A1.Stability.We assume data of any institution should be stable without the impact from outside.To be specific,the key factors like the donation amount and the performance index should remain unchanged if the college does not receive new donations.A2.Goodgrant Foundation’s donation(Increase in donation amount)is discrete rather than continuous.This is reasonable because each donation is usually an integer multiple of a minimum amount,like$1m.After referring to the data of other foundations like Lumina Foundation,we recommend donation amount should be one value in the set below:{500000,1000000,1500000, (10000000)A3.The performance index is a linear composition of all given performance indicators.A4.Performance contributing variables linearly affect the performance index.A5.Increase in donation amount affects the performance index through performance con-tributing variables.A6.The impact of increase in donation amount on performance contributing variables con-tains2parts:homogenous one and heterogenous one.The homogenous influence is repre-sented by a smooth function from donation amount to performance contributing variables.And the heterogenous one is represented by deviation from the function.1.4The Advantages of Our ModelOur model exhibits many advantages in application:•The evaluation model is fully data based with few subjective or arbitrary decision rules.•Our model successfully identifies the underlying mechanism instead of merely focusing on the relation between donation amount and the performance index.•Our model takes both homogeneity and heterogeneity into consideration.•Our model makes full use of the cross-section data and does not need time-series data to produce reasonable outcomes.2Addressing the Missing ValuesThe provided datasets suffer from severe data missing,which could undermine the reliabil-ity and interpretability of any results.To cope with this problem,we adopt several different methods for data with varied missing rate.For data with missing rate over50%,any current prevailing method would fall victim to under-or over-randomization.As a result,we omit this kind of data for simplicity’s sake.For variables with missing rate between10%-50%,we use imputation techniques(Little and Rubin,2014)where a missing value was imputed from a randomly selected similar record,and model-based analysis where missing values are substituted with distribution diagrams.For variables with missing rate under10%,we address missingness by simply replace miss-ing value with mean of existing values.3Determining the Performance IndexIn this section,we derive a composite index,called the performance index,to evaluate the educational performance of students at every institution.3.1Performance IndicatorsFirst,we need to determine which variables from various institutional performance data are direct indicators of Goodgrant Foundation’s major concern–to enhance students’educational performance.In practice,other charitable foundations such as Gates Foundation place their focus on core indexes like attendance and graduation rate.Logically,we select performance indicators on the basis of its correlation with these core indexes.With this method,miscellaneous performance data from the excel table boils down to4crucial variables.C150_4_P OOLED_SUP P and C200_L4_P OOLED_SUP P,as completion rates for different types of institutions,are directly correlated with graduation rate.We combine them into one variable.Md_earn_wne_p10and gt_25k_p6,as different measures of graduates’earnings,are proved in empirical studies(Ehren-berg,2004)to be highly dependent on educational performance.And RP Y_3Y R_RT_SUP P, as repayment rate,is also considered valid in the same sense.Let them be Y1,Y2,Y3and Y4.For easy calculation and interpretation of the performance index,we apply uniformization to all4variables,as to make sure they’re on the same scale(from0to100).3.2Performance Index via Principal-Component FactorsAs the model assumes the performance index is a linear composition of all performance indicators,all we need to do is determine the weights of these variables.Here we apply the method of Customer Satisfaction Index model(Rogg et al,2001),where principal-component factors(pcf)are employed to determine weights of all aspects.The pcf procedure uses an orthogonal transformation to convert a set of observations of pos-sibly correlated variables into a set of values of linearly uncorrelated variables called principal-component factors,each of which carries part of the total variance.If the cumulative proportion of the variance exceeds80%,it’s viable to use corresponding pcfs(usually thefirst two pcfs)to determine weights of original variables.In this case,we’ll get4pcfs(named P CF1,P CF2,P CF3and P CF4).First,the procedure provides the linear coefficients of Y m in the expression of P CF1and P CF2.We getP CF1=a11Y1+a12Y2+a13Y3+a14Y4P CF2=a21Y1+a22Y2+a23Y3+a24Y4(a km calculated as corresponding factor loadings over square root of factor k’s eigenvalue) Then,we calculate the rough weights c m for Y m.Let the variance proportions P CF1and P CF2 represent be N1and N2.We get c m=(a1m N1+a2m N2)/(N1+N2)(This formulation is justifiedbecause the variance proportions can be viewed as the significance of pcfs).If we let perfor-mance index=(P CF 1N 1+P CF 2N 2)/(N 1+N 2),c m is indeed the rough weight of Y m in terms of variance)Next,we get the weights by adjusting the sum of rough weights to 1:c m =c m /(c 1+c 2+c 3+c 4)Finally,we get the performance index,which is the weighted sum of the 4performance indicator.Performance index= m (c m Y m )Table 2presents the 10institutions with largest values of the performance index.This rank-ing is highly consistent with widely acknowledged rankings,like QS ranking,which indicates the validity of the performance index.Table 2:The Top 10Institutions in Terms of Performance IndexInstitutionPerformance index Los Angeles County College of Nursing and Allied Health79.60372162Massachusetts Institute of Technology79.06066895University of Pennsylvania79.05044556Babson College78.99269867Georgetown University78.90468597Stanford University78.70586395Duke University78.27719116University of Notre Dame78.15843964Weill Cornell Medical College 78.143341064Identifying Performance Contributing Variables via post-LASSO The next step of our model requires identifying the factors that may exert an influence on the students’educational performance from a variety of variables mentioned in the excel table and the pdf file (108in total,some of which are dummy variables converted from categorical variables).To achieve this purpose,we used a model called LASSO.A linear model is adopted to describe the relationship between the endogenous variable –performance index –and all variables that are potentially influential to it.We assign appropriate coefficient to each variable to minimize the square error between our model prediction and the actual value when fitting the data.min β1J J j =1(y j −x T j β)2where J =2881,x j =(1,x 1j ,x 2j ,...,x pj )THowever,as the amount of the variables included in the model is increasing,the cost func-tion will naturally decrease.So the problem of over fitting the data will arise,which make the model we come up with hard to predict the future performance of the students.Also,since there are hundreds of potential variables as candidates.We need a method to identify the variables that truly matter and have a strong effect on the performance index.Here we take the advantage of a method named post-LASSO (Tibshirani,1996).LASSO,also known as the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator,is a method used for variableselection and shrinkage in medium-or high-dimensional environment.And post-LASSO is to apply ordinary least squares(OLS)to the model selected byfirst-step LASSO procedure.In LASSO procedure,instead of using the cost function that merely focusing on the square error between the prediction and the actual value,a penalty term is also included into the objective function.We wish to minimize:min β1JJj=1(y j−x T jβ)2+λ||β||1whereλ||β||1is the penalty term.The penalty term takes the number of variables into con-sideration by penalizing on the absolute value of the coefficients and forcing the coefficients of many variables shrink to zero if this variable is of less importance.The penalty coefficient lambda determines the degree of penalty for including variables into the model.After min-imizing the cost function plus the penalty term,we couldfigure out the variables of larger essence to include in the model.We utilize the LARS algorithm to implement the LASSO procedure and cross-validation MSE minimization(Usai et al,2009)to determine the optimal penalty coefficient(represented by shrinkage factor in LARS algorithm).And then OLS is employed to complete the post-LASSO method.Figure2:LASSO path-coefficients as a function of shrinkage factor sFigure3:Cross-validated MSEFig2.displays the results of LASSO procedure and Fig3displays the cross-validated MSE for different shrinkage factors.As specified above,the cross-validated MSE reaches minimum with shrinkage factor between0.4-0.8.We choose0.6andfind in Fig2that6variables have nonzero coefficients via the LASSO procedure,thus being selected as the performance con-tributing variables.Table3is a demonstration of these6variables and corresponding post-LASSO results.Table3:Post-LASSO resultsDependent variable:performance_indexPCTPELL−26.453∗∗∗(0.872)PPTUG_EF−14.819∗∗∗(0.781)StudentToFaculty_ratio−0.231∗∗∗(0.025)Tuition&Fees20100.0003∗∗∗(0.00002)Carnegie_HighResearchActivity 5.667∗∗∗(0.775)Constant61.326∗∗∗(0.783)Observations2,880R20.610Adjusted R20.609Note:PCTPELL is percentage of students who receive aPell Grant;PPTUG_EF is share of students who are part-time;Carnegie_HighResearchActivity is Carnegie classifica-tion basic:High Research ActivityThe results presented in Table3are consistent with common sense.For instance,the pos-itive coefficient of High Research Activity Carnegie classification implies that active research activity helps student’s educational performance;and the negative coefficient of Student-to-Faculty ratio suggests that decrease in faculty quantity undermines students’educational per-formance.Along with the large R square value and small p-value for each coefficient,the post-LASSO procedure proves to select a valid set of performance contributing variables and describe well their contribution to the performance index.5Determining Investment Strategy based on ROIWe’ve identified5performance contributing variables via post-LASSO.Among them,tu-ition&fees in2010and Carnegie High-Research-Activity classification are quite insusceptible to donation amount.So we only consider the effects of increase in donation amount on per-centage of students who receive a Pell Grant,share of students who are part-time and student-to-faculty ratio.We denote them with F1,F2and F3,their post-LASSO coefficients withβ1,β2andβ3.In this section,wefirst introduce the procedure used tofit the relation between performance contributing variables and donation amount.Then we provide the model employed to calcu-latefitted ROIs of performance contributing variables(the homogenous influence of increase in donation amount)and the tuning parameter(the heterogenous influence of increase in dona-tion amount).Next,we introduce how to determine stly,we show how the maximiza-tion determines the investment strategy,including selection of institutions and distribution of investments.5.1Fitted Curve between Performance Contributing Variables and Donation AmountSince we have already approximated the linear relation between the performance index with the3performance contributing variables,we want to know how increase in donation changes them.In this paper,we use Generalized Adaptive Model(GAM)to smoothlyfit the relations. Generalized Adaptive Model is a generalized linear model in which the dependent variable depends linearly on unknown smooth functions of independent variables.Thefitted curve of percentage of students who receive a Pell Grant is depicted below in Fig4(see the other two fitted curves in Appendix):Figure4:GAM ApproximationA Pell Grant is money the U.S.federal government provides directly for students who needit to pay for college.Intuitively,if the amount of donation an institution receives from other sources such as private donation increases,the institution is likely to use these donations to alleviate students’financial stress,resulting in percentage of students who receive a Pell Grant. Thus it is reasonable to see afitted curve downward sloping at most part.Also,in commonsense,an increase in donation amount would lead to increase in the performance index.This downward sloping curve is consistent with the negative post-LASSO coefficient of percentage of students who receive a Pell Grant(as two negatives make a positive).5.2ROI(Return on Investment)5.2.1Model of Fitted ROIs of Performance Contributing Variables fROI iFigure5:Demonstration of fROI1Again,we usefitted curve of percentage of students who receive a Pell Grant as an example. We modeled the bluefitted curve to represent the homogeneous relation between percentage of students who receive a Pell Grant and donation amount.Recallfitted ROI of percentage of students who receive a Pell Grant(fROI1)is change in fitted values(∆f)over increase in donation amount(∆X).SofROI1=∆f/∆XAccording to assumption A2,the amount of each Goodgrant Foundation’s donation falls into a pre-specified set,namely,{500000,1000000,1500000,...,10000000}.So we get a set of possible fitted ROI of percentage of students who receive a Pell Grant(fROI1).Clearly,fROI1is de-pendent on both donation amount(X)and increase in donation amount(∆X).Calculation of fitted ROIs of other performance contributing variables is similar.5.2.2Model of the tuning parameter P iAlthough we’ve identified the homogenous influence of increase in donation amount,we shall not neglect the fact that institutions utilize donations differently.A proportion of do-nations might be appropriated by the university’s administration and different institutions allocate the donation differently.For example,university with a more convenient and well-maintained system of identifying students who needfinancial aid might be willing to use a larger portion of donations to directly aid students,resulting in a lower percentage of under-graduate students receiving Pell grant.Also,university facing lower cost of identifying and hiring suitable faculty members might be inclined to use a larger portion of donations in this direction,resulting in a lower student-to-faculty ratio.These above mentioned reasons make institutions deviate from the homogenousfitted func-tion and presents heterogeneous influence of increase in donation amount.Thus,while the homogenous influence only depends on donation amount and increase in donation amount, the heterogeneous influence is institution-specific.To account for this heterogeneous influence,we utilize a tuning parameter P i to adjust the homogenous influence.By multiplying the tuning parameter,fitted ROIs of performance con-tributing variables(fitted value changes)convert into ROI of performance contributing variable (true value changes).ROI i=fROI i·P iWe then argue that P i can be summarized by a function of deviation from thefitted curve (∆h),and the function has the shape shown in Fig6.The value of P i ranges from0to2,because P i can be viewed as an amplification or shrinkage of the homogenous influence.For example,P i=2means that the homogeneous influence is amplified greatly.P i=0means that this homogeneous influence would be entirely wiped out. The shape of the function is as shown in Fig6because of the following reasons.Intuitively,if one institution locates above thefitted line,when deviation is small,the larger it is,the larger P i is.This is because the institution might be more inclined to utilize donations to change that factor.However,when deviation becomes even larger,the institution grows less willing to invest on this factor.This is because marginal utility decreases.The discussion is similar if one institution initially lies under thefitted line.Thus,we assume the function mapping deviation to P i is similar to Fig6.deviation is on the x-axis while P i is on the y-axis.Figure6:Function from Deviation to P iIn order to simplify calculation and without loss of generality,we approximate the function。

电池剩余放电时间预测摘要：铅酸电池作为电源被广泛应用与工业、军事、日常生活，所以电池的性能及其预测成为影响电池应用的一个关键因素，额定容量，额定电压，放电电流，自放电率都对铅酸电池的使用产生直接的影响。

因此，铅酸电池剩余电量的精确估算具有十分重要的理论意义和现实应用价值[1]。

对于问题1，题文中给出的要求，要计算20A~100A的9组放电曲线，根据给出的数据，观察到数据的不同变化规律，对数据进行分段处理，分别针对不同段的数据进行放电曲线拟合，进而得到各电流强度下的放电曲线方程。

根据附件中所给出的MRE定义，求解出9组数据的平均相对误差MRE，通过求出的数据看出，本题所建立模型，使得计算数据与样本数据误差较小，对于问题1所建立模型较为理想。

根据已知放电曲线模型，可以计算出电流强度在30A~70A五种情况的剩余放电时间。

对于问题2，要求得任一恒定电流强度的放电曲线，可以利用曲面拟合方法得到由已知的电流强度为20A~30A的九组放电数据组合形成的曲面。

利用matlab 中的曲面拟合方法得到曲面方程表示的任意电流强度下的电池放电模型。

根据本问题得到的曲面模型计算得出MRE与问题一曲线拟合方法计算得出MRE进行比较，确定模型的精度。

根据本题给出的模型，即可得到55A时，各个时刻所对应的电压点。

对于问题3，通过分析电池在不同衰减状态下的电压和放电时间关系，可以得到各衰减状态与电池电压之间的关系，通过分析相邻两个衰减状态的放电时间差值，可以得到新电池与衰减状态1，衰减状态1与衰减状态2，衰减状态2与衰减状态3之间放电时间差值的变化趋势，对三个放电时间差值的变化趋势进行分析，并根据已知的数据计算可以得到部分衰减状态2与衰减状态3之间的差值，进而拟合得到该差值的变化曲线方程，从而可以计算得到衰减状态2和衰减状态3之间的所有差值，据此差值可以预测出衰减状态3下的所有放电时间值。

关键字：放电特性曲线拟合曲面拟合模型新电池在使用中，随着使用时间的增多以及给定电流的强度的不同，电池的使用时间也会不同。

2016年高教社杯全国大学生数学建模竞赛题目（请先阅读“全国大学生数学建模竞赛论文格式规范”）A题系泊系统的设计近浅海观测网的传输节点由浮标系统、系泊系统和水声通讯系统组成（如图1所示）。

某型传输节点的浮标系统可简化为底面直径2m、高2m的圆柱体，浮标的质量为1000kg。

系泊系统由钢管、钢桶、重物球、电焊锚链和特制的抗拖移锚组成。

锚的质量为600kg，锚链选用无档普通链环，近浅海观测网的常用型号及其参数在附表中列出。

钢管共4节，每节长度1m，直径为50mm，每节钢管的质量为10kg。

要求锚链末端与锚的链接处的切线方向与海床的夹角不超过16度，否则锚会被拖行，致使节点移位丢失。

水声通讯系统安装在一个长1m、外径30cm的密封圆柱形钢桶内，设备和钢桶总质量为100kg。

钢桶上接第4节钢管，下接电焊锚链。

钢桶竖直时，水声通讯设备的工作效果最佳。

若钢桶倾斜，则影响设备的工作效果。

钢桶的倾斜角度（钢桶与竖直线的夹角）超过5度时，设备的工作效果较差。

为了控制钢桶的倾斜角度，钢桶与电焊锚链链接处可悬挂重物球。

图1 传输节点示意图（仅为结构模块示意图，未考虑尺寸比例）系泊系统的设计问题就是确定锚链的型号、长度和重物球的质量，使得浮标的吃水深度和游动区域及钢桶的倾斜角度尽可能小。

问题1某型传输节点选用II型电焊锚链22.05m，选用的重物球的质量为1200kg。

现将该型传输节点布放在水深18m、海床平坦、海水密度为1.025×103kg/m3的海域。

若海水静止，分别计算海面风速为12m/s和24m/s时钢桶和各节钢管的倾斜角度、锚链形状、浮标的吃水深度和游动区域。

问题2在问题1的假设下，计算海面风速为36m/s时钢桶和各节钢管的倾斜角度、锚链形状和浮标的游动区域。

请调节重物球的质量，使得钢桶的倾斜角度不超过5度，锚链在锚点与海床的夹角不超过16度。

问题3 由于潮汐等因素的影响，布放海域的实测水深介于16m~20m之间。