MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2328190611 · doi:10.1061/40644(2002)92

SWMM Calibration Using Genetic Algorithms

2002· article· en· W2328190611 on OpenAlexaff
Benny Wan, William James

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFlood Risk Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStorm Water Management ModelGenetic algorithmCrossoverSensitivity (control systems)Computer scienceRobustness (evolution)Mathematical optimizationCalibrationAlgorithmEngineeringSurface runoffMathematicsMachine learningStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to improve the reliability of the Storm Water Management Model (SWMM), a parameter-optimization approach is required to determine the "best" input parameter sets. Within SWMM, the RUNOFF module is the best candidate module for uncertainty reduction by parameter optimization. The Genetic algorithm (GA) method is developed to optimize SWMM RUNOFF parameters. The basic principle of the GA is the same as that which controls the genetic reproduction process with crossover and mutation being the major operations. By applying the genetic algorithm to SWMM with the aid of the sensitivity wizard in PCSWMM, a sensitivity-based method for automating the calibration of the runoff model is developed. Overall, the average accuracy of the calibrated model was within 97% of the target dataset (TD) after approximately 58 cycles of the GA calibration program. The paper covers the genetic algorithm calibration method and its accuracy, efficiency, robustness and reliability.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations19
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFlood Risk Assessment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207