MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4225677208 · doi:10.3390/mca27020032

On the Prediction of Evaporation in Arid Climate Using Machine Learning Model

2022· article· en· W4225677208 on OpenAlexaff
Mansura Jasmine, Abdolmajid Mohammadian, Hossein Bonakdari

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematical and Computational Applications · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrological Forecasting Using AI
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdaptive neuro fuzzy inference systemPan evaporationParticle swarm optimizationMean squared errorInference systemWind speedMeteorologyEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceEvaporationStatisticsMathematicsFuzzy logicMachine learningArtificial intelligenceGeographyFuzzy control system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Evaporation calculations are important for the proper management of hydrological resources, such as reservoirs, lakes, and rivers. Data-driven approaches, such as adaptive neuro fuzzy inference, are getting popular in many hydrological fields. This paper investigates the effective implementation of artificial intelligence on the prediction of evaporation for agricultural area. In particular, it presents the adaptive neuro fuzzy inference system (ANFIS) and hybridization of ANFIS with three optimizers, which include the genetic algorithm (GA), firefly algorithm (FFA), and particle swarm optimizer (PSO). Six different measured weather variables are taken for the proposed modelling approach, including the maximum, minimum, and average air temperature, sunshine hours, wind speed, and relative humidity of a given location. Models are separately calibrated with a total of 86 data points over an eight-year period, from 2010 to 2017, at the specified station, located in Arizona, United States of America. Farming lands and humid climates are the reason for choosing this location. Ten statistical indices are calculated to find the best fit model. Comparisons shows that ANFIS and ANFIS–PSO are slightly better than ANFIS–FFA and ANFIS–GA. Though the hybrid ANFIS–PSO (R2= 0.99, VAF = 98.85, RMSE = 9.73, SI = 0.05) is very close to the ANFIS (R2 = 0.99, VAF = 99.04, RMSE = 8.92, SI = 0.05) model, preference can be given to ANFIS, due to its simplicity and easy operation.

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)0.001
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations9
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMathematical and Computational ApplicationsSame topicHydrological Forecasting Using AIFrench-language works237,207