MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2588382693 · doi:10.1016/j.asej.2016.10.014

Scale dependent prediction of reference evapotranspiration based on Multi-Variate Empirical mode decomposition

2017· article· en· W2588382693 on OpenAlexfundno aff
S. Adarsh, Sulaiman Sanah, K.K. Murshida, P. Nooramol

Bibliographic record

VenueAin Shams Engineering Journal · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrological Forecasting Using AI
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Saskatchewan
KeywordsEvapotranspirationHilbert–Huang transformWind speedMode (computer interface)Scale (ratio)Stepwise regressionStatisticsMathematicsEnvironmental scienceMeteorologyComputer scienceGeographyEnergy (signal processing)Ecology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study proposes a novel method for estimation of reference evapotranspiration ( ET o ) by accounting the time scale of variability using the Multivariate Empirical Mode Decomposition (MEMD). First the ET o and the four predictor variables such as solar radiation, air temperature, relative humidity and wind velocity are decomposed into different intrinsic mode functions (IMFs) and a residue using MEMD. To model ET o , first the modes are modeled separately using the Stepwise Linear Regression (SLR) after identifying the significant predictors at different time scales based on the p -value statistics. Subsequently, the predicted modes are recombined to obtain ET o at the observation scale. The method is demonstrated by predicting the monthly ET o from Stratford station in United States. The results of the study clearly exhibited the superior performance of the proposed MEMD-SLR model when compared with that by M5 model tree, SLR and the EMD-SLR hybrid 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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.283 · 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

Citations38
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAin Shams Engineering JournalSame topicHydrological Forecasting Using AIFrench-language works237,207