MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2129414683 · doi:10.1155/2013/308159

Predicting Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity by Artificial Intelligence and Regression Models

2013· article· lv· W2129414683 on OpenAlexaff
Ruhollah Rezaei Arshad, Gh. Sayyad, Mohammad Reza Mosaddeghi, Bahram Gharabaghi

Bibliographic record

VenueISRN Soil Science · 2013
Typearticle
Languagelv
FieldEngineering
TopicSoil and Unsaturated Flow
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlgorithmArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Saturated hydraulic conductivity (<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M1"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mi>K</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>s</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math>), among other soil hydraulic properties, is important and necessary in water and mass transport models and irrigation and drainage studies. Although this property can be measured directly, its measurement is difficult and very variable in space and time. Thus pedotransfer functions (PTFs) provide an alternative way to predict the <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M2"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mi>K</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>s</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math> from easily available soil data. This study was done to predict the <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M3"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mi>K</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>s</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math> in Khuzestan province, southwest Iran. Three Intelligence models including (radial basis function neural networks (RBFNN), multi layer perceptron neural networks (MLPNN)), adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system (ANFIS) and multiple-linear regression (MLR) to predict the <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M4"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mi>K</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>s</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math> were used. Input variable included sand, silt, and clay percents and bulk density. The total of 175 soil samples was divided into two groups as 130 for the training and 45 for the testing of PTFs. The results indicated that ANFIS and RBFNN are effective methods for <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M5"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mi>K</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>s</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math> prediction and have better accuracy compared with the MLPNN and MLR models. The correlation between predicted and measured <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M6"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mi>K</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>s</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math> values using ANFIS was better than artificial neural network (ANN). Mean square error values for ANFIS, ANN, and MLR were 0.005, 0.02, and 0.17, respectively, which shows that ANFIS model is a powerful tool and has better performance than ANN and MLR in prediction of <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M7"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mi>K</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>s</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math>.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.825
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.216 · 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.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations39
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueISRN Soil ScienceSame topicSoil and Unsaturated FlowFrench-language works237,207