Prediction of Hourly Solar Radiation in Amman-Jordan by Using Artificial Neural Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, three Artificial Neural Network (ANN) models (Feedforward network, Elman, and Nonlinear Autoregressive Exogenous (NARX)) were used to predict hourly solar radiation in Amman, Jordan. The three models were constructed and tested by using MATLAB software. Meteorological data for the years from 2000 to 2010 were used to train the ANN while the yearly data of 2011 was used to test it. It was found that ANN technique may be used to estimate the hourly solar radiation with an excellent accuracy, and the coefficient of determination of Elman, feedforward and NARX models were found to be 0.97353, 0.97376, and 0.99017, respectively. The obtained results showed that NARX model has the best ability to predict the required solar data, while Elman and feedforward models have the lowest ability to predict it
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 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".