Predictive Analysis of Municipal Solid Waste Generation Using an Optimized Neural Network Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Developing successful municipal waste management planning strategies is crucial for implementing sustainable development. The research proposed the application of an optimized artificial neural network (ANN) to forecast quantities of waste in Poland. The neural network coupled with particle swarm optimization (PSO) algorithm is compared to the conventional neural network using five assessment metrics. The metrics are coefficient of efficiency (CE), Pearson correlation coefficient (R), Willmott’s index of agreement (WI), root mean squared error (RMSE), and mean bias error (MBE). Selected explanatory factors are incorporated in the developed models to reflect the influence of economic, demographic, and social aspects on the rate of waste generation. These factors are population, employment to population ratio, revenue per capita, number of entities by type of business activity, and number of entities enlisted in REGON per 10,000 population. According to the findings, the ANN–PSO model (CE = 0.92, R = 0.96, WI = 0.98, RMSE = 11,342.74, and MBE = 6548.55) significantly outperforms the traditional ANN model (CE = 0.11, R = 0.68, WI = 0.78, RMSE = 38,571.68, and MBE = 30,652.04). The significant level of the reported outputs is evaluated using the Wilcoxon–Mann–Whitney U-test, with a significance level of 0.05. The p-values of the pairings (ANN, observed) and (ANN, ANN–PSO) are all less than 0.05, suggesting that the models are statistically different. On the other hand, the P-value of (ANN–PSO, observed) is more than 0.05, suggesting that the difference between the models is statistically insignificant. Therefore, the proposed ANN–PSO model proves its efficiency at estimating municipal solid waste quantities and may be regarded as a cost-efficient method of developing integrated waste management systems.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".