A new selection metric for multiobjective hydrologic model calibration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A novel selection metric called Convex Hull Contribution (CHC) is introduced for solving multiobjective (MO) optimization problems with Pareto fronts that can be accurately approximated by a convex curve. The hydrologic model calibration literature shows that many biobjective calibration problems with a proper setup result in such Pareto fronts. The CHC selection approach identifies a subset of archived nondominated solutions whose map in the objective space forms convex approximation of the Pareto front. The optimization algorithm can sample solely from these solutions to more accurately approximate the convex shape of the Pareto front. It is empirically demonstrated that CHC improves the performance of Pareto Archived Dynamically Dimensioned Search (PA‐DDS) when solving MO problems with convex Pareto fronts. This conclusion is based on the results of several benchmark mathematical problems and several hydrologic model calibration problems with two or three objective functions. The impact of CHC on PA‐DDS performance is most evident when the computational budget is somewhat limited. It is also demonstrated that 1,000 solution evaluations (limited budget in this study) is sufficient for PA‐DDS with CHC‐based selection to achieve very high quality calibration results relative to the results achieved after 10,000 solution evaluations.
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 | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".