{"title":"基于人工神经网络(RBFNN和GRNN)、多元线性回归(MLR)和插值方法的大地水准面波动预测比较研究","authors":"B. Konakoglu, Alper Akar","doi":"10.15446/esrj.v25n4.91195","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The present work aimed to develop a prediction model to estimate geoid undulation and to compare its efficiency with other methods including radial basis function neural network (RBFNN), generalized regression neural network (GRNN), multiple linear regression (MLR) and, ten different interpolation methods. In this study, the k-fold cross-validation method was used to evaluate the model and its behavior on the independent dataset. With this validation method, each of a k number of groups has the chance to be divided into training and testing data. The performances of the methods were evaluated in terms of the root mean square error (RMSE) mean absolute error (MAE), Nash–Sutcliffe efficiency coefficient (NSE), and correlation coefficient (R2) and using graphical indicators. The evaluation of the performance of the datasets obtained using cross-validation was done in two ways. If we accept the method having the minimum error result as the most appropriate method, the natural neighbor (NN) method in the DS#5 dataset gave better results than the other methods (RMSE=0.14173 m, MAE=0.09729 m, NSE=0.98986, and R2=0.99011. On the other hand, it has been observed that, the GRNN method exhibited the best performance, on average, with RMSE=0.18539 m, MAE=0.13676 m, NSE=0.98229, and R2=0.98249.","PeriodicalId":11456,"journal":{"name":"Earth Sciences Research Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Geoid undulation prediction using ANNs (RBFNN and GRNN), multiple linear regression (MLR), and interpolation methods: A comparative study\",\"authors\":\"B. Konakoglu, Alper Akar\",\"doi\":\"10.15446/esrj.v25n4.91195\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The present work aimed to develop a prediction model to estimate geoid undulation and to compare its efficiency with other methods including radial basis function neural network (RBFNN), generalized regression neural network (GRNN), multiple linear regression (MLR) and, ten different interpolation methods. In this study, the k-fold cross-validation method was used to evaluate the model and its behavior on the independent dataset. With this validation method, each of a k number of groups has the chance to be divided into training and testing data. The performances of the methods were evaluated in terms of the root mean square error (RMSE) mean absolute error (MAE), Nash–Sutcliffe efficiency coefficient (NSE), and correlation coefficient (R2) and using graphical indicators. The evaluation of the performance of the datasets obtained using cross-validation was done in two ways. If we accept the method having the minimum error result as the most appropriate method, the natural neighbor (NN) method in the DS#5 dataset gave better results than the other methods (RMSE=0.14173 m, MAE=0.09729 m, NSE=0.98986, and R2=0.99011. On the other hand, it has been observed that, the GRNN method exhibited the best performance, on average, with RMSE=0.18539 m, MAE=0.13676 m, NSE=0.98229, and R2=0.98249.\",\"PeriodicalId\":11456,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Earth Sciences Research Journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-02-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Earth Sciences Research Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"89\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15446/esrj.v25n4.91195\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"地球科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Earth Sciences Research Journal","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15446/esrj.v25n4.91195","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Geoid undulation prediction using ANNs (RBFNN and GRNN), multiple linear regression (MLR), and interpolation methods: A comparative study
The present work aimed to develop a prediction model to estimate geoid undulation and to compare its efficiency with other methods including radial basis function neural network (RBFNN), generalized regression neural network (GRNN), multiple linear regression (MLR) and, ten different interpolation methods. In this study, the k-fold cross-validation method was used to evaluate the model and its behavior on the independent dataset. With this validation method, each of a k number of groups has the chance to be divided into training and testing data. The performances of the methods were evaluated in terms of the root mean square error (RMSE) mean absolute error (MAE), Nash–Sutcliffe efficiency coefficient (NSE), and correlation coefficient (R2) and using graphical indicators. The evaluation of the performance of the datasets obtained using cross-validation was done in two ways. If we accept the method having the minimum error result as the most appropriate method, the natural neighbor (NN) method in the DS#5 dataset gave better results than the other methods (RMSE=0.14173 m, MAE=0.09729 m, NSE=0.98986, and R2=0.99011. On the other hand, it has been observed that, the GRNN method exhibited the best performance, on average, with RMSE=0.18539 m, MAE=0.13676 m, NSE=0.98229, and R2=0.98249.
期刊介绍:
ESRJ publishes the results from technical and scientific research on various disciplines of Earth Sciences and its interactions with several engineering applications.
Works will only be considered if not previously published anywhere else. Manuscripts must contain information derived from scientific research projects or technical developments. The ideas expressed by publishing in ESRJ are the sole responsibility of the authors.
We gladly consider manuscripts in the following subject areas:
-Geophysics: Seismology, Seismic Prospecting, Gravimetric, Magnetic and Electrical methods.
-Geology: Volcanology, Tectonics, Neotectonics, Geomorphology, Geochemistry, Geothermal Energy, ---Glaciology, Ore Geology, Environmental Geology, Geological Hazards.
-Geodesy: Geodynamics, GPS measurements applied to geological and geophysical problems.
-Basic Sciences and Computer Science applied to Geology and Geophysics.
-Meteorology and Atmospheric Sciences.
-Oceanography.
-Planetary Sciences.
-Engineering: Earthquake Engineering and Seismology Engineering, Geological Engineering, Geotechnics.