Comparison of multivariate adaptive regression splines with coupled wavelet transform artificial neural networks for runoff forecasting in Himalayan micro-watersheds with limited data
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
Himalayan watersheds are characterized by mountainous topography and a lack of available data. Due to the complexity of rainfall–runoff relationships in mountainous watersheds and the lack of hydrological data in many of these watersheds, process-based models have limited applicability for runoff forecasting in these areas. In light of this, accurate forecasting methods that do not necessitate extensive data sets are required for runoff forecasting in mountainous watersheds. In this study, multivariate adaptive regression spline (MARS), wavelet transform artificial neural network (WA-ANN), and regular artificial neural network (ANN) models were developed and compared for runoff forecasting applications in the mountainous watershed of Sainji in the Himalayas, an area with limited data for runoff forecasting. To develop and test the models, three micro-watersheds were gauged in the Sainji watershed in Uttaranchal State in India and data were recorded from July 1 2001 to June 30 2003. It was determined that the best WA-ANN and MARS models were comparable in terms of forecasting accuracy, with both providing very accurate runoff forecasts compared to the best ANN model. The results indicate that the WA-ANN and MARS methods are promising new methods of short-term runoff forecasting in mountainous watersheds with limited data, and warrant additional study.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it