Discharge coefficient prediction of canal radial gate using neurocomputing models: an investigation of free and submerged flow scenarios
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the current study, three machine learning (ML) models, i.e. Gaussian process regression (GPR), generalized regression neural network (GRNN), and multigene genetic programming (MGGP), were developed for predicting the discharge coefficient (Cd) of a radial gate under two different flow conditions, i.e. free and submerged. The modeling development of the flow and geometry input variables for the Cd was determined based on statistical correlations. We also performed a sensitivity analysis of the input variables for the Cd. The modeling results indicated that the developed ML models attained acceptable predictable performance; however, the prediction accuracy of the models was better under the free flow condition. In quantitative terms, the minimum root mean square error (RMSE) value was 0.010 using the GPR model and 0.019 using the MGGP model for the submerged and free flow conditions, respectively. The sensitivity analysis evidenced that the ratio of the gate opening height to the depth of water in the upstream (W:Yo) was the influential variable for the Cd under the free flow condition, whereas the ratio of the depth of water in the upstream to the depth of water in downstream (Yo:YT) was the influential variable for the Cd under the submerged flow condition.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".