The α-Representation Inexact T2 Fuzzy Sets Programming Model for Water Resources Management of the Southern Min River Basin under Uncertainty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, a new α-representation of the inexact T2 fuzzy sets programming model (α-RITF2SP) is proposed for water resources planning under uncertainties. The developed model is a hybrid of inexact type-2 (T2) fuzzy sets (FSs) optimal programming based on α-cuts and α-planes (z-slices) algorithms, and both can be used in problems of water resource management without a loss of generality. Therefore, this novel method represents a complementary method to combine both of these algorithms to make inexact T2FSs methods easier and faster for users under uncertainties. This method provides not only a reduction in computations when computing fuzzy functions, but also a map of the primary variable of T2FSs in the secondary membership function. The α-RITF2SP is applied to a real case study of the operation of water resource systems in the southern Min River basin that involves three cities: Xiamen, Zhangzhou, and Quanzhou. The results of the water allocations and benefits have been analyzed. The symptoms of results indicate the higher profit with a higher wastewater treatment rate. It also represents that this model has enhanced abilities and it is relevant and practical as well as can serve as a guide for the development of this regional economy.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".