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 OpenAlexaff
Peyman Yousefi, Sina Shabani, Hadi Mohammadi, Gholamreza Naser

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.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.011
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

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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProcedia EngineeringSame topicWater resources management and optimizationFrench-language works237,207