MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409574825 · doi:10.61091/jcmcc127a-057

Design and Application of Garden Water Management Models Incorporating Internet of Things (IoT) Technology

2025· article· en· W4409574825 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial Computing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Quality Monitoring Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInternet of ThingsComputer scienceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 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)0.002
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.163
Threshold uncertainty score0.543

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial ComputingSame topicWater Quality Monitoring TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207