MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3046048985 · doi:10.3390/ijgi9080479

Daily Water Level Prediction of Zrebar Lake (Iran): A Comparison between M5P, Random Forest, Random Tree and Reduced Error Pruning Trees Algorithms

2020· article· en· W3046048985 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

VenueISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrological Forecasting Using AI
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Forests
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMean squared errorRandom forestPruningStatisticsStandard deviationTree (set theory)Decision treeAlgorithmComputer scienceCorrelation coefficientMathematicsMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Zrebar Lake is one of the largest freshwater lakes in Iran and it plays an important role in the ecosystem of the environment, while its desiccation has a negative impact on the surrounded ecosystem. Despite this, this lake provides an interesting recreation setting in terms of ecotourism. The prediction and forecasting of the water level of the lake through simple but practical methods can provide a reliable tool for future lake water resource management. In the present study, we predict the daily water level of Zrebar Lake in Iran through well-known decision tree-based algorithms, including the M5 pruned (M5P), random forest (RF), random tree (RT) and reduced error pruning tree (REPT). We used five different water input combinations to find the most effective one. For our modeling, we chose 70% of the dataset for training (from 2011 to 2015) and 30% for model evaluation (from 2015 to 2017). We evaluated the models’ performances using different quantitative (root mean square error (RMSE), mean absolute error (MAE), coefficient of determination (R2), percent bias (PBIAS) and ratio of the root mean square error to the standard deviation of measured data (RSR)) and visual frameworks (Taylor diagram and box plot). Our results showed that water level with a one-day lag time had the highest effect on the result and, by increasing the lag time, its effect on the result was decreased. This result indicated that all the developed models had a good prediction capability, but the M5P model outperformed the others, followed by RF and RT equally and then REPT. Our results showed that these algorithms can predict water level accurately only with a one-day lag time in water level as an input and they are cost-effective tools for future predictions.

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)0.001
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 score0.254
Threshold uncertainty score0.486

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.223 · 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