MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Port Throughput Forecasting Based on Broad Learning System with Considering Influencing Factors

2020· article· en· W3049149478 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yiying Li, Tieshan Li, Yi Zuo

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning and ELM
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThroughputPort (circuit theory)Computer scienceContainer (type theory)UnivariateQuarter (Canadian coin)Machine learningMultivariate statisticsEngineeringTelecommunicationsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the development of the shipping industry, port throughput has increased significantly in recent years. Chinese ports have become increasingly important. The fluctuation of container throughput in ports is affected by many factors. The effective and accurate forecasting of port throughput provides a scientific reference for the development of the port. Based on the port throughput data of Lianyun Port in China from the first quarter of 2005 to the fourth quarter of 2016, this paper uses univariate linear regression, multiple linear regression, and broad learning system to forecast the container throughput of the port in each quarter of 2017 and 2018. Comparing the forecasting results with the actual throughput. The experimental results show that the broad learning system can consider two economic influencing factors about the throughput at the same time and forecast port throughput accurately and effectively. Therefore, broad learning system is more suitable for the forecasting of port throughput than other methods.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMachine Learning and ELMFrench-language works237,207