MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4415609082 · doi:10.1038/s41598-025-22130-y

Bayesian-optimized machine learning boosts actual evapotranspiration prediction in water-stressed agricultural regions of China

2025· article· en· W4415609082 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmed Elbeltagi, Aman Srivastava, Xinchun Cao, Vinay Kumar Gautam, Bilel Zeroualı, Muhammad Rizwan Aslam, Ali Salem, Hojjat Emami, Elsayed Ahmed Elsadek

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPlant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEvapotranspirationMean squared errorSupport vector machineEmpirical modellingBayesian optimizationHyperparameterKrigingRegressionGaussian processRandom forest

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The accurate estimation of actual evapotranspiration (AET) is crucial for sustainable water resource management, especially in water-scarce and agriculturally intensive regions like Beijing and Tianjin, China. Traditional methods for AET estimation, whether empirical or physically based, often face limitations due to high data requirements, limited scalability, and sensitivity to input uncertainties. This creates a critical research gap in providing reliable AET predictions under data-limited conditions. To address this, we evaluated the efficacy of integrating four advanced machine learning (ML) models: Support Vector Machine (SVM), Gaussian Process Regression (GPR), Ensemble Tree, and Neural Network, with Bayesian hyperparameter optimization for AET modeling using the high-resolution TerraClimate dataset spanning 1958–2022. Key meteorological variables, including maximum and minimum temperature (Tmax and Tmin), solar radiation (SR), wind speed (WS), vapor pressure deficit (VPD), and precipitation (PPT), were selected through rigorous correlation and multicollinearity analyses. Model performance was assessed using the coefficient of determination (R2), mean squared error (MSE), root mean squared error (RMSE), and mean absolute error (MAE) on a 75:25 train-test split. Results demonstrate that the optimizable GPR model achieved the highest predictive accuracy (RMSE = 5.54, R2 = 0.98 on test data), outperforming other ML approaches and traditional empirical models. PPT, Tmin, and Tmax emerged as the most influential predictors for AET. Our findings reveal that ML models, particularly when optimized via Bayesian techniques, yield a robust, scalable, and data-efficient alternative for AET estimation in regions with limited meteorological records. This study establishes a new benchmark for AET modeling, with significant implications for irrigation scheduling, drought monitoring, and integrated water management in the North China Plain and comparable agro-ecological regions.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.111

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.187 · 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

Citations7
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific Reports→Same topicPlant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics→French-language works237,207→