MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1556672459 · doi:10.1109/ijcnn.2005.1556347

Streamflow forecasting with uncertainty estimate using Bayesian learning for ANN

2006· article· en· W1556672459 on OpenAlexaff
M Sajjad Khan, Paulin Coulibaly

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings. 2005 IEEE International Joint Conference on Neural Networks, 2005. · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrological Forecasting Using AI
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial neural networkStreamflowBayesian probabilityMachine learningArtificial intelligenceMultilayer perceptronBayesian networkPerceptronHydrographReliability (semiconductor)Data miningSurface runoff

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accurate site-specific streamflow forecasts along with uncertainty estimate are of particular importance for water resources planning and management. In the last decade, different types of artificial neural network (ANN) models have been shown as promising alternative methods for rainfall-runoff modeling. However, one of the critical issues with ANN based modeling remains the lack of confidence limits for the prediction results. Therefore, whatever the accuracy of the prediction values, there is a lack of reliability for practical applications. The Bayesian learning algorithm overcomes that limitation by providing uncertainty estimates of the predicted results. The present paper introduces a Bayesian learning approach for ANN modeling of daily streamflows implemented with a multilayer perceptron (MLP). The proposed model results are compared with those obtained from a multilayer perceptron trained with a 'scaled conjugate gradient' method. Overall, the model validation statistics and hydrograph comparison indicate that the Bayesian learning approach outperforms the conventional approach in almost all respects.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings. 2005 IEEE International Joint Conference on Neural Networks, 2005.Same topicHydrological Forecasting Using AIFrench-language works237,207