Water demand forecasting using extreme learning machines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The capacity of recently-developed extreme learning machine (ELM) modelling approaches in forecasting daily urban water demand from limited data, alone or in concert with wavelet analysis (W) or bootstrap (B) methods (i.e., ELM, ELMW, ELMB), was assessed, and compared to that of equivalent traditional artificial neural network-based models (i.e., ANN, ANNW, ANNB). The urban water demand forecasting models were developed using 3-year water demand and climate datasets for the city of Calgary, Alberta, Canada. While the hybrid ELMBand ANNBmodels provided satisfactory 1-day lead-time forecasts of similar accuracy, the ANNWand ELMWmodels provided greater accuracy, with the ELMWmodel outperforming the ANNWmodel. Significant improvement in peak urban water demand prediction was only achieved with the ELMWmodel. The superiority of the ELMWmodel over both the ANNWor ANNBmodels demonstrated the significant role of wavelet transformation in improving the overall performance of the urban water demand model.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".