MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400982131 · doi:10.14796/jwmm.c519

A Probabilistic Markov Chain Model for Short-term Water Demand Forecasting

2024· article· en· W4400982131 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Seyedhossein Sajadifar, Marjan Pakseresht

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Water Management Modeling · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater resources management and optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTerm (time)Markov chainProbabilistic logicProbabilistic forecastingMarkov modelComputer scienceDemand forecastingEconometricsOperations researchEconomicsMathematicsArtificial intelligenceMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Urban water management remains a crucial concern for city managers and planners. As water demand forecasting plays a key role in urban water management, identifying factors influencing water demand is particularly important to mitigate water shortage crises. This study utilizes a Markov chain model and Artificial Neural Networks (ANNs) to estimate short-term urban water demand in Tehran. The variables considered for estimation include maximum temperature, water consumption, and precipitation rate in the previous four days. These variables are used as previous events to predict water consumption on the fifth day. Daily data from March 21, 2018 to March 19, 2021 were collected for analysis. The results of the study indicate that the Markov model's forecasting is more accurate compared to the ANN model. The Markov chain model demonstrated 48% and 65% improvement in accuracy compared to the ANN model for the test data and the training data, respectively. This suggests that a Markov chain model can be a valuable tool for estimating short-term urban water demand. The findings of this study can contribute to better urban water management and planning to address water shortage issues effectively.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.817
Threshold uncertainty score0.600

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Water Management ModelingSame topicWater resources management and optimizationFrench-language works237,207