MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220933802 · doi:10.18280/ijdne.170118

Develop Evaporation Model Using Multiple Linear Regression in the Western Desert of Iraq –Horan Valley

2022· article· en· W4220933802 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Design & Nature and Ecodynamics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrological Forecasting Using AI
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Anbar
KeywordsLinear regressionPan evaporationEvaporationRegression analysisAridMean squared errorStepwise regressionWind speedMathematicsEnvironmental scienceStatisticsMeteorologyGeographyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Evaporation is influenced by several meteorological parameters, evaporation data are usually difficult to obtain compared to rainfall data, especially in arid regions. Developing a monthly evaporation prediction model in arid regions in terms of available meteorological data is a significant step. The data used in this study for modeling are monthly measurements to cover substantial continuity over a period of 18 years between January 2000 and December 2017. Stepwise and backward multiple linear regression techniques were used with a new procedure of variable selection to select the best model. Temperature, wind speed, relative humidity and sunshine hours were used as a independent variables in the multiple linear regression (MLR) technique to establish the best prediction of the evaporation model. To examine the MLR evaporation developed model in the current study, MLR results were compared with the most common evaporation models commonly used in arid regions such as Kharufa and Khosla methods. The results of performance indicators shows that the R2 values are approximately 0.937, 0.90 and 0.85 for MLR evaporation developed model, Kharufa and Khosla methods, respectively. Moreover, the values of the error measures, namely RMSE and NAE for MLR evaporation developed model were 36.3 and 0.123, Kharufa model 71.22 and 0.241 and Khosla model was and 173.7 and 0.581 respectively. Based on the foregoing, the results of the MLR developed evaporation model in the current study outperforms in all performance indicators and proves to be better than the Kharufa and Khosla models.

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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.237

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.253 · 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