Comparison of Multivariate Regression and Artificial Neural Networks for Peak Urban Water-Demand Forecasting: Evaluation of Different ANN Learning Algorithms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For the past several years, Cyprus has been facing an unprecedented water crisis. Four options that have been considered to help resolve the problem of drought in Cyprus include imposing effective water use restrictions, implementing water-demand reduction programs, optimizing water supply systems, and developing sustainable alternative water source strategies. An important aspect of these initiatives is the accurate forecasting of short-term water demands, and in particular, peak water demands. This study compared multiple linear regression and three types of multilayer perceptron artificial neural networks (each of which used a different type of learning algorithm) as methods for peak weekly water-demand forecast modeling. The analysis was performed on 6 years of peak weekly water-demand data and meteorological variables (maximum weekly temperature and total weekly rainfall) for two different regions (Athalassa and Public Garden) in the city of Nicosia, Cyprus. 20 multiple linear regression models, 20 Levenberg-Marquardt artificial neural network (ANN) models, 20 resilient back-propagation ANN models, and 20 conjugate gradient Powell-Beale ANN models were developed, and their relative performance was compared. For both the Athalassa and Public Garden regions in Nicosia, the Levenberg-Marquardt ANN method was found to provide a more accurate prediction of peak weekly water demand than the other two types of ANNs and multiple linear regression. It was also found that the peak weekly water demand in Nicosia is better correlated with the rainfall occurrence rather than the amount of rainfall itself.
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 | 0.006 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".