MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2976184869 · doi:10.3390/e21100947

Introducing the Ensemble-Based Dual Entropy and Multiobjective Optimization for Hydrometric Network Design Problems: EnDEMO

2019· article· en· W2976184869 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueEntropy · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater resources management and optimization
Canadian institutionsUnited Nations University Institute for Water, Environment, and HealthMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceEntropy (arrow of time)Mathematical optimizationDual (grammatical number)Network planning and designData miningMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Entropy applications in hydrometric network design problems have been extensively studied in the most recent decade. Although many studies have successfully found the optimal networks, there have been assumptions which could not be logically integrated into their methodology. One of the major assumptions is the uncertainty that can arise from data processing, such as time series simulation for the potential stations, and the necessary data quantization in entropy calculations. This paper introduces a methodology called ensemble-based dual entropy and multiobjective optimization (EnDEMO), which considers uncertainty from the ensemble generation of the input data. The suggested methodology was applied to design hydrometric networks in the Nelson-Churchill River Basin in central Canada. First, the current network was evaluated by transinformation analysis. Then, the optimal networks were explored using the traditional deterministic network design method and the newly proposed ensemble-based method. Result comparison showed that the most frequently selected stations by EnDEMO were fewer and appeared more reliable for practical use. The maps of station selection frequency from both DEMO and EnDEMO allowed us to identify preferential locations for additional stations; however, EnDEMO provided a more robust outcome than the traditional approach.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.836
Threshold uncertainty score0.560

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.185
Teacher spread0.176 · 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