Regional low‐flow frequency analysis using single and ensemble artificial neural networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, artificial neural networks (ANNs) are introduced to obtain improved regional low‐flow estimates at ungauged sites. A multilayer perceptron (MLP) network is used to identify the functional relationship between low‐flow quantiles and the physiographic variables. Each ANN is trained using the Levenberg‐Marquardt algorithm. To improve the generalization ability of a single ANN, several ANNs trained for the same task are used as an ensemble. The bootstrap aggregation (or bagging) approach is used to generate individual networks in the ensemble. The stacked generalization (or stacking) technique is adopted to combine the member networks of an ANN ensemble. The proposed approaches are applied to selected catchments in the province of Quebec, Canada, to obtain estimates for several representative low‐flow quantiles of summer and winter seasons. The jackknife validation procedure is used to evaluate the performance of the proposed models. The ANN‐based approaches are compared with the traditional parametric regression models. The results indicate that both the single and ensemble ANN models provide superior estimates than the traditional regression models. The ANN ensemble approaches provide better generalization ability than the single ANN models.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".