Artificial neural network modeling of water table depth fluctuations
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
Three types of functionally different artificial neural network (ANN) models are calibrated using a relatively short length of groundwater level records and related hydrometeorological data to simulate water table fluctuations in the Gondo aquifer, Burkina Faso. Input delay neural network (IDNN) with static memory structure and globally recurrent neural network (RNN) with inherent dynamical memory are proposed for monthly water table fluctuations modeling. The simulation performance of the IDNN and the RNN models is compared with results obtained from two variants of radial basis function (RBF) networks, namely, a generalized RBF model (GRBF) and a probabilistic neural network (PNN). Overall, simulation results suggest that the RNN is the most efficient of the ANN models tested for a calibration period as short as 7 years. The results of the IDNN and the PNN are almost equivalent despite their basically different learning procedures. The GRBF performs very poorly as compared to the other models. Furthermore, the study shows that RNN may offer a robust framework for improving water supply planning in semiarid areas where aquifer information is not available. This study has significant implications for groundwater management in areas with inadequate groundwater monitoring network.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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