MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Nonpoint‐Source Pollution Reduction for an Iowa Watershed: An Application of Evolutionary Algorithms

2010· article· en· W1995699749 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sergey S. Rabotyagov, Manoj K. Jha, Todd Campbell

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d agroeconomie · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWatershedForestryNonpoint source pollutionEnvironmental scienceRobustness (evolution)Water qualityWelfare economicsComputer scienceGeographyEcologyEconomicsChemistryMachine learningBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We apply an integrated simulation‐optimization framework to search for cost‐efficient mix and location of agricultural conservation practices in a typical agricultural watershed for two types of nitrogen reduction targets: control of mean annual nitrogen loadings, and a “safety‐first” type constraint, insisting that nitrogen targets be met in every weather realization (weather‐resilient solutions). Evolutionary algorithms are developed for each of the appropriate water quality targets. Our approach allows for the derivation of a watershed‐level total and marginal nitrogen abatement cost curve. Controlling for the probability of meeting water quality targets (looking for weather‐resilient solutions) is found to be significantly more costly than controlling the average nitrogen loadings. Both types of solutions are assessed for robustness with respect to weather uncertainty: solutions selected to reduce average loadings do well under weather uncertainty, while the robustness of solutions selected to be resilient decreases with the stringency of the water quality goal . Nous avons appliqué un modèle intégré de simulation‐optimisation pour trouver des combinaisons de pratiques agricoles de conservation efficaces en terme de coûts et les endroits où elles devraient être adoptées dans un bassin versant agricole typique pour deux types de cibles de réduction des charges d’azote : la surveillance des charges moyennes annuelles d’azote et une contrainte du type « sécurité d’abord », selon laquelle les cibles d’azote doivent être respectées peu importe les conditions météorologiques (solutions robustes aux changements météorologiques). Nous avons élaboré des algorithmes évolutifs pour chaque cible relative à la qualité de l’eau. Notre approche a permis de dériver la courbe de coût liéà la réduction marginale et totale de l’azote dans un bassin versant. L’ajustement de la probabilité que les cibles relatives à la qualité de l’eau soient respectées (solutions robustes aux changements météorologiques) s’est révélé significativement plus coûteux que de contrôler les charges moyennes d’azote. Nous avons évalué les deux types de solutions afin de vérifier leur performance dans des conditions météorologiques incertaines : les solutions retenues pour réduire les charges moyennes fonctionnent bien dans des conditions météorologiques incertaines, tandis que la performance des solutions robustes aux conditions météorologiques diminue avec le niveau visé de qualité de l’eau .

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 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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.685
Threshold uncertainty score0.962

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.176
Teacher spread0.164 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations34
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d agroeconomieSame topicHydrology and Watershed Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207