Monthly runoff forecasting by means of artificial neural networks (ANNs)
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.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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 it