MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1502470484

Deriving reservoir operating rules via fuzzy regression and ANFIS.

2003· article· en· W1502470484 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Society for Fuzzy Logic and Technology Conference · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater resources management and optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdaptive neuro fuzzy inference systemComputer scienceFuzzy logicReservoir computingNeuro-fuzzyMathematical optimizationTerm (time)Fuzzy control systemData miningArtificial intelligenceMachine learningMathematicsArtificial neural network
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The methods of ordinary least-squares regression (OLSR), fuzzy regression (FR), and adaptive network fuzzy inference system (ANFIS) are compared in inferring operating rules for a reservoir operations problem. Dynamic programming (DP) is used to provide the input-output data set to be used by OLSR, FR, and ANFIS models. The coefficients of an FR model are found by solving a linear programming (LP) problem. A trained fuzzy inference system (ANFIS) is also used to derive the reservoir operating rules as fuzzy if-then rules. The OLSR, FR, and ANFIS based rules are then simulated and compared. The methods are applied to a long-term planning problem and to a medium-term implicit stochastic optimization model. FR is useful to derive operating rules for the long-term model, where partial information is available. ANFIS is beneficial in the medium term implicit stochastic model as it is able to extract important features of the system from the generated input-output set.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.392
Threshold uncertainty score0.586

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.192 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it