MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407326094 · doi:10.2166/wcc.2025.645

Hybridizing persistent homology and machine learning for oceanographic time series

2025· article· en· W4407326094 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Zixin Lin, Nur Fariha Syaqina Zulkepli, Mohd Shareduwan Mohd Kasihmuddin, R. U. Gobithaasan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Water and Climate Change · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTopological and Geometric Data Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSupport vector machineCluster analysisMachine learningArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceBuoyTime seriesData miningRegressionHierarchical clusteringEngineeringMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Oceanographic phenomena are inherently complex due to factors such as global warming, ice melting, and human activities. Analyzing oceanographic data presents a challenging task, and a quantitative approach is often implemented to address these complexities. Traditional machine learning techniques, such as regression and cluster analysis, are commonly employed for predicting and identifying similarities in oceanographic conditions across different locations. This study explores the integration of qualitative approaches into oceanographic data analysis by developing hybrid models that combine topological data analysis (TDA) with traditional machine learning methods. The focus is on extracting qualitative features using persistent homology, the core tool of TDA, and incorporating these features into machine learning models such as support vector regression (SVR) and hierarchical clustering analysis (HCA). The study applies these methods to the following two oceanographic datasets: wave height data from buoy stations in Canada and sea level data from gauge stations in Japan. The results show that the hybrid models significantly outperform traditional approaches across several performance metrics, including the R2 score, maximum absolute error, mean squared error, and Rand score. This demonstrates the value of adding topological information to machine learning models, which enhances their predictive 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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.241
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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Water and Climate ChangeSame topicTopological and Geometric Data AnalysisFrench-language works237,207