Monthly runoff forecasting by means of artificial neural networks (ANNs)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the last decade or so, artificial neural networks (ANNs) have become one of the most promising tools formodelling hydrological processes such as rainfall runoff processes. However, the employment of a single model doesnot seem to be an appropriate approach for modelling such a complex, nonlinear, and discontinuous process thatvaries in space and time. For this reason, this study aims at decomposing the process into different clusters based onself-organizing map (SOM) ANN approach, and thereafter modelling different clusters into outputs using separatefeed-forward multilayer perceptron (MLP) and supervised self-organizing map (SSOM) ANN models. Specifically,three different SOM models have been employed in order to cluster the input patterns into two, three, and fourclusters respectively so that each cluster in each model corresponds to certain physics of the process underinvestigation and thereafter modelling of the input patterns in each cluster into corresponding outputs using feedforwardMLP and SSOM ANN models. The employed models were developed on two different watersheds, Iranianand Canadian. It was found that although the idea of decomposition based on SOM is highly persuasive, our resultsindicate that there is a need for more principled procedure in order to decompose the process. Moreover, according tothe modelling results the SSOM can be considered as an alternative approach to the feed-forward MLP.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".