MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W194799047

Fuzzy Neural Networks for water level and discharge forecasting

2010· article· en· W194799047 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInstitutional Research Information System University of Ferrara (University of Ferrara) · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrological Forecasting Using AI
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial neural networkFuzzy logicFuzzy numberNeuro-fuzzyFuzzy setExtension (predicate logic)Set (abstract data type)MathematicsAdaptive neuro fuzzy inference systemArtificial intelligenceFuzzy set operationsVariable (mathematics)Computer scienceData miningFuzzy control system
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new procedure for water level (or discharge) forecasting under uncertainty using artificial neural networks is proposed: uncertainty is expressed in the form of a fuzzy number. For this purpose, the parameters of the neural network, namely, the weights and biases, are represented by fuzzy numbers rather than crisp numbers. Through the application of the extension principle, the fuzzy number representative of the output variable (water level or discharge) is then calculated at each time step on the basis of a set of crisp inputs and fuzzy parameters of the neural network. 
\nThe proposed neural network thus allows uncertainty to be taken into account at the forecasting stage not providing only deterministic or crisp predictions, but rather predictions in terms of “the discharge (or level) will fall between two values, indicated according to the level of credibility considered, whereas it will take on a certain value when the level of credibility is maximum”.
\nThe fuzzy parameters of the neural network are estimated using a calibration procedure that imposes a constraint whereby for an assigned h-level the envelope of the corresponding intervals representing the outputs (forecasted levels or discharges, calculated at different points in time) must include a prefixed percentage of observed values.
\nThe proposed model is applied to two different case studies. Specifically, the data related to the first case study are used to develop and test a flood event-based water level forecasting model, whereas the data related to the latter are used for continuous discharge forecasting.
\nThe results obtained are compared with those provided by other data-driven models - Bayesian neural networks (Neal, R.M. 1992, Bayesian training of backpropagation networks by the hybrid Monte Carlo method. Tech. Rep. CRG-TR-92-1, Dep. of Comput. Sci., Univ. of Toronto, Toronto, Ont., Canada.) and the Local Uncertainty Estimation Model (Shrestha D.L. and Solomatine D.P. 2006, Machine learning approaches for estimation of prediction interval for the model output. Neural Networks, 19(2), 225-235.). The comparison shows the effectiveness of the fuzzy neural network forecasting model in estimating water levels or discharges under uncertainty. In particular, the fuzzy neural network enables us to define bands that describe, for an assigned h-level, the range of variability of the predicted variable. An analysis of the results obtained reveals that these bands generally have a slightly smaller width compared to the bands obtained using other data-driven models, the percentage of observed values contained within the bands being equal.

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)0.001
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 score0.314
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.112
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.150 · 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