On the Prediction of Evaporation in Arid Climate Using Machine Learning Model
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it