ArticlePloS one2024
Long-term water demand forecasting using artificial intelligence models in the Tuojiang River basin, China.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Accurate forecasts of water demand are a crucial factor in the strategic planning and judicious use of finite water resources within a region, underpinning sustainable socio-economic development. This study aims to compare the applicability of various artificial intelligence models for long-term water demand forecasting across different water use sectors. We utilized the Tuojiang River basin in Sichuan Province as our case study, comparing the performance of five artificial intelligence models: Genetic Algorithm optimized Back Propagation Neural Network (GA-BP), Extreme Learning Machine (ELM), Gaussian Process Regression (GPR), Support Vector Regression (SVR), and Random Forest (RF). These models were employed to predict water demand in the agricultural, industrial, domestic, and ecological sectors using actual water demand data and relevant influential factors from 2005 to 2020. Model performance was evaluated based on the Root Mean Square Error (RMSE), Mean Absolute Error (MAE), and Mean Absolute Percentage Error (MAPE), with the most effective model used for 2025 water demand projections for each sector within the study area. Our findings reveal that the GPR model demonstrated superior results in predicting water demand for the agricultural, domestic, and ecological sectors, attaining R2 values of 0.9811, 0.9338, and 0.9142 for the respective test sets. Also, the GA-BP model performed optimally in predicting industrial water demand, with an R2 of 0.8580. The identified optimal prediction model provides a useful tool for future long-term water demand forecasting, promoting sustainable water resource management.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.