Forecasting Methane Data Using Multivariate Long Short-Term Memory Neural Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Over the past few decades, Alberta has witnessed a remarkable expansion in its oil and gas sector. Unfortunately, this growth has come at a cost, as Alberta has become the fastest-growing source of pollutant emissions in greenhouse gases (GHGs), sulphur emissions, and water pollution in Canada. Among these GHGs, methane stands out as the second most prevalent GHG, possessing a global warming potential ~ 28 times higher than carbon dioxide over a span of 100 years, and ~ 80 times higher over a period of 20 years. Since 1986, the Alberta Energy Regulator (AER) has been diligently gathering data on methane concentrations. Although this data is publicly available, its analysis has not been thoroughly explored. Our study aims to investigate the impact of temperature, wind speed, and wind direction on the predictions of methane concentration time series data, utilizing a long short-term memory (LSTM) neural network model. Our findings indicate that the inclusion of climate variables enhances the predictive capabilities of the LSTM model. However, the results show that it is not obvious which variable has the most impact on the improvement although temperature appears to have a better effect on improving predictive performance compared to wind speed and direction. The results also suggest that the variance of the input data does not affect forecasting performance.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".