Design and Application of Garden Water Management Models Incorporating Internet of Things (IoT) Technology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Garden is an important support for regional economic development, but also an important support for regional ecological environmental protection, the rational allocation of water resources in the garden is one of the effective ways to solve the problem of water shortage. This paper takes the Internet of things, digital twin as the technical basis, uses the multi-objective optimisation algorithm to construct the water resource management model of the garden area, and uses the artificial fish swarm algorithm to solve the model. By constructing a digital twin irrigation district water resources scheduling management platform, the water resources elements of the garden area are comprehensively monitored and sensed, and the intelligent simulation of the water resources allocation management process and decision-making scheme evaluation and optimisation are achieved, so as to enhance the intelligent and refined management level of water resources scheduling of the garden area, and comprehensively realise the saving and intensive use of water resources. Taking X garden area as a research case, the water resources management model finally derives the optimal water resources allocation scheme under 50%, 75% and 90% in each planning year, which provides support for the efficient use of water resources in X garden area.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".