MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Harmful Algal Blooms Prediction Model: Dealing With Limited Datasets

2023· article· en· W4387735350 on OpenAlexaff
Aris Yaman, Reny Puspasari, Zaenal Akbar, Ariani Indrawati, Yulia Aris Kartika, Lindung Parningotan Manik, Setiya Triharyuni, Hatim Albasri, Sandi Wibowo, Hilman F. Pardede

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrological Forecasting Using AI
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransfer of learningComputer scienceBuoyProcess (computing)Artificial intelligenceMachine learningData modelingAlgal bloomArtificial neural networkWater qualityDeep learningData miningEcologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

HABs pose serious threats to natural aquatic systems, such as mass mortality of aquatic organisms, degradation of water quality, and human poisoning from consuming aquatic organisms exposed to HABs. Monitoring water quality and weather data through buoy data loggers is very useful nowadays. Through these buoys, environmental data can be accessed in real time. Various technical constraints on these buoys will directly and indirectly result in missing values (limited data sets). It often happens that one has a good idea of a learning model, but due to its complexity and smaller number of data sets, the model performs far below expectations. Transfer learning approaches and data synthesis with the CT GAN algorithm have been applied to deal with modelling on limited datasets. The transfer learning model gives better results. It can be seen from the value of model evaluation parameters (AUC and MSE) that the transfer learning model provides better results than other models (model-based CTGAN and deep learning model without transfer learning). The process of adapting (fine-tuning) knowledge is an important process in improving the performance of the model in the transfer learning procedure.

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)0.003
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 score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
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 science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.240
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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHydrological Forecasting Using AIFrench-language works237,207