MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1641747283 · doi:10.1029/2005wr004317

Spiking modular neural networks: A neural network modeling approach for hydrological processes

2006· article· en· W1641747283 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Resources Research · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrological Forecasting Using AI
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsArtificial neural networkComputer scienceModular designEvapotranspirationLayer (electronics)DiscretizationArtificial intelligenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Artificial Neural Networks (ANNs) have been widely used for modeling hydrological processes that are embedded with high nonlinearity in both spatial and temporal scales. The input‐output functional relationship does not remain the same over the entire modeling domain, varying at different spatial and temporal scales. In this study, a novel neural network model called the spiking modular neural networks (SMNNs) is proposed. An SMNN consists of an input layer, a spiking layer, and an associator neural network layer. The modular nature of the SMNN helps in finding domain‐dependent relationships. The performance of the model is evaluated using two distinct case studies. The first case study is that of streamflow modeling, and the second case study involves modeling of eddy covariance‐measured evapotranspiration. Two variants of SMNNs were analyzed in this study. The first variant employs a competitive layer as the spiking layer, and the second variant employs a self‐organizing map as the spiking layer. The performance of SMNNs is compared to that of a regular feed forward neural network (FFNN) model. Results from the study demonstrate that SMNNs performed better than FFNNs for both the case studies. Results from partitioning analysis reveal that, compared to FFNNs, SMNNs are effective in capturing the dynamics of high flows. In modeling evapotranspiration, it is found that net radiation and ground temperature alone can be used to model the evaporation flux effectively. The SMNNs are shown to be effective in discretizing the complex mapping space into simpler domains that can be learned with relative ease.

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)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.857

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.222 · 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