MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2999099692 · doi:10.3390/su12020631

Sustainability Ranking of Desalination Plants Using Mamdani Fuzzy Logic Inference Systems

2020· article· en· W2999099692 on OpenAlexaff
Rabee Rustum, Anu Mary John Kurichiyanil, Shaun A. Forrest, Corrado Sommariva, Adebayo J. Adeloye, Mohammad Zounemat‐Kermani, Miklas Scholz

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental and Social Impact Assessments
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDesalinationSustainabilityWater desalinationRanking (information retrieval)AdaptabilityFlexibility (engineering)Fuzzy logicFuzzy inference systemEngineeringAdaptive neuro fuzzy inference systemEnvironmental economicsComputer scienceFuzzy control systemMathematicsArtificial intelligenceEcologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As water desalination continues to expand globally, desalination plants are continually under pressure to meet the requirements of sustainable development. However, the majority of desalination sustainability research has focused on new desalination projects, with limited research on sustainability performance of existing desalination plants. This is particularly important while considering countries with limited resources for freshwater such as the United Arab Emirates (UAE) as it is heavily reliant on existing desalination infrastructure. In this regard, the current research deals with the sustainability analysis of desalination processes using a generic sustainability ranking framework based on Mamdani Fuzzy Logic Inference Systems. The fuzzy-based models were validated using data from two typical desalination plants in the UAE. The promising results obtained from the fuzzy ranking framework suggest this more in-depth sustainability analysis should be beneficial due to its flexibility and adaptability in meeting the requirements of desalination sustainability.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score0.871

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations47
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainabilitySame topicEnvironmental and Social Impact AssessmentsFrench-language works237,207