MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2612389131 · doi:10.1016/j.proeng.2017.03.268

Gene Expression Programing in Long Term Water Demand Forecasts Using Wavelet Decomposition

2017· article· en· W2612389131 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

VenueProcedia Engineering · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater resources management and optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGene expression programmingWaveletDecompositionTerm (time)Projection (relational algebra)Haar waveletComputer scienceExpression (computer science)EconometricsWavelet transformMathematicsArtificial intelligenceEcologyAlgorithmDiscrete wavelet transformBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Increasing draught seasons and lack of access to potable water reserves have been the major risks threatening water authorities and governments over the recent years. Therefore, long term water forecasts are receiving much more attention nowadays. Unlike the conventional projection of historical water demand, researchers have tried to implement sophisticated mathematical models to predict demand of water. Gene expression programming (GEP), as a relatively new forecasting technique, remains to be explored in this endeavor. The main purpose of this research was to assess the performance of GEP models using wavelet decomposition with 2 transfer functions (db2 and haar) and 3 levels. Results of this study showed GEP models can be highly sensitive to wavelet decomposition if all combinations of proper lag times are used as inputs feeding these models.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.093
Threshold uncertainty score0.674

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.212 · 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