MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388281482 · doi:10.1016/j.rineng.2023.101566

The latest innovative avenues for the utilization of artificial Intelligence and big data analytics in water resource management

2023· article· en· W4388281482 on OpenAlexaff
Hesam Kamyab, Tayebeh Khademi, Shreeshivadasan Chelliapan, Morteza SaberiKamarposhti, Shahabaldin Rezania, Mohammad Yusuf, Mohammad Farajnezhad, Mohamed Abbas, Byong‐Hun Jeon, Yongtae Ahn

Bibliographic record

VenueResults in Engineering · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFlood Risk Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
FundersKhon Kaen UniversityMinistry of Science, ICT and Future PlanningNational Research Foundation of KoreaDeanship of Scientific Research, King Khalid University
KeywordsBig dataStewardship (theology)AnalyticsComputer scienceWater resourcesResource (disambiguation)Data scienceBusiness intelligenceResource management (computing)Knowledge managementEngineering managementManagement scienceEngineeringData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effective management of water resources is essential to environmental stewardship and sustainable development. Traditional approaches to water resource management (WRM) struggle with real-time data acquisition, effective data analysis, and intelligent decision-making. To address these challenges, innovative solutions are required. Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Big Data Analytics (BDA) are at the forefront and have the potential to revolutionize the way water resources are managed. This paper reviews the current applications of AI and BDA in WRM, highlighting their capacity to overcome existing limitations. It includes the investigation of AI technologies, such as machine learning and deep learning, and their diverse applications to water quality monitoring, water allocation, and water demand forecasting. In addition, the review explores the role of BDA in the management of water resources, elaborating on the various data sources that can be used, such as remote sensing, IoT devices, and social media. In conclusion, the study synthesizes key insights and outlines prospective directions for leveraging AI and BDA for optimal water resource allocation.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.011
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations268
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResults in EngineeringSame topicFlood Risk Assessment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207