An influent generator for WRRF design and operation based on a recurrent neural network with multi-objective optimization using a genetic algorithm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nowadays, modelling, automation and control are widely used for Water Resource Recovery Facilities (WRRF) upgrading and optimization. Influent generator (IG) models are used to provide relevant input time series for dynamic WRRF simulations used in these applications. Current IG models found in literature are calibrated on the basis of a single performance criterion, such as the mean percentage error or the root mean square error. This results in the IG being adequate on average but with a lack of representativeness of, for instance, the observed temporal variability of the dataset. However, adequately capturing influent variability may be important for certain types of WRRF optimization, e.g., reaction to peak loads, control system performance evaluation, etc. Therefore, in this study, a data-driven IG model is developed based on the long short-term memory (LSTM) recurrent neural network and is optimized by a multi-objective genetic algorithm for both mean percentage error and variability. Hence, the influent generator model is able to generate a time series with a probability distribution that better represents reality, thus giving a better influent description for WRRF design and operation. To further increase the variability of the generated time series and in this way approximate the true variability better, the model is extended with a random walk process.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".