MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2137831162 · doi:10.5194/hess-14-1943-2010

Experimental investigation of the predictive capabilities of data driven modeling techniques in hydrology - Part 2: Application

2010· article· en· W2137831162 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueHydrology and earth system sciences · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEvapotranspirationSupport vector machineGenetic programmingComputer scienceSurface runoffArtificial neural networkWater contentRegressionData miningStatisticsHydrology (agriculture)Machine learningMathematicsEngineeringEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. In this second part of the two-part paper, the data driven modeling (DDM) experiment, presented and explained in the first part, is implemented. Inputs for the five case studies (half-hourly actual evapotranspiration, daily peat soil moisture, daily till soil moisture, and two daily rainfall-runoff datasets) are identified, either based on previous studies or using the mutual information content. Twelve groups (realizations) were randomly generated from each dataset by randomly sampling without replacement from the original dataset. Neural networks (ANNs), genetic programming (GP), evolutionary polynomial regression (EPR), Support vector machines (SVM), M5 model trees (M5), K-nearest neighbors (K-nn), and multiple linear regression (MLR) techniques are implemented and applied to each of the 12 realizations of each case study. The predictive accuracy and uncertainties of the various techniques are assessed using multiple average overall error measures, scatter plots, frequency distribution of model residuals, and the deterioration rate of prediction performance during the testing phase. Gamma test is used as a guide to assist in selecting the appropriate modeling technique. Unlike two nonlinear soil moisture case studies, the results of the experiment conducted in this research study show that ANNs were a sub-optimal choice for the actual evapotranspiration and the two rainfall-runoff case studies. GP is the most successful technique due to its ability to adapt the model complexity to the modeled data. EPR performance could be close to GP with datasets that are more linear than nonlinear. SVM is sensitive to the kernel choice and if appropriately selected, the performance of SVM can improve. M5 performs very well with linear and semi linear data, which cover wide range of hydrological situations. In highly nonlinear case studies, ANNs, K-nn, and GP could be more successful than other modeling techniques. K-nn is also successful in linear situations, and it should not be ignored as a potential modeling technique for hydrological applications.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.903
Threshold uncertainty score0.922

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.221 · 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