The verification of numerical models with multivariate randomized block permutation procedures

The aim of the present research is to calculate the Relative Accuracy (R.A) and Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) for the location of Technical Institute, Mosul in Nineveh Governorate, Iraq. at the northern part of Mosul city by using surveying Instruments (GPS 1230 , Total Station 06 & Level NAK2), to calculate the coordinates and elevations of (16) Ground Control Points which covered the study area. The field data, remote sensing techniques and GIS software (Arc Map GIS10.3) are used to check the digital map of study area that helped the administrator to take the correct decision, determining positions of the future expansionist for buildings, roads, measuring lengths, areas and there coordinates, directions as well as the total costs estimation needed for any development from the final map. The gradient percentage between the highest and lowest points is calculated to be (9.954%). Relative accuracy for the based measured points (R.A) = 1:60000), and Root Mean Square error in Easting coordinates (RMSE) = ± 0.102m, in Northing coordinates (RMSN) = ± 0.096m, the Root Mean Square for the resultant (RMSR) = ± 0.099m, and Root Mean Square for Elevations ( RMSRL)= ± 0.005m. We Matched and correlated (10) measured points from study area with their graphic data positions on the aerial photo, determining the offsets for position and elevations as follows: (RMSE = ± 0.076m), (RMSN = ± 0.125m), (RMSR = ± 0.088m), and (Root Mean Square for Elevations = RMSRL= ± 0.045m). This research enable us after checking the results to produce new maps from Aerial photograph or Digital Image to use it for land uses and future extensions in whole study area.

OPINION article Front. Physiol., 22 January 2014Sec. Integrative Physiology Volume 4 - 2013 | https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2013.00403

The bulk elemental composition of soil subsurface (B) horizons is influenced by environmental, biological, geological, and climatic factors. Because fossil soils (paleosols) are common in the geologic record, quantitative models that link climate to paleosol geochemistry are highly desirable in the paleoclimate community. Error associated with these models is typically reported as the root mean square error (RMSE) of a regression analysis and reflects the variability imparted by non-climatic influences on soil formation and the uncertainty associated with model fitting. However, for prediction purposes, the RMSE is well known to underestimate model uncertainty. In this work we re-evaluate a widely used transfer function for mean annual precipitation (MAP) based on the chemical index of alteration minus potassium (CIA-K) using data science best practices on two continental-scale soil data sets. Data set inter-comparisons and cross-validation of exponential regression models indicate that the root mean square prediction error (RMSPE) between CIA-K and MAP for soils representative of climates across the continental United States is around 299 mm, significantly higher than the currently accepted 182 mm RMSE. Further, CIA-K is unable to predict perhumid (>2000 mm MAP) climate zones. We show that transitioning from a simple regression framework to one of recursive partitioning via random forests can significantly increase prediction accuracy while automating variable selection. We introduce two new, widely applicable random forest models for MAP (RF-MAP) that use 10 elemental oxides as input variables and were calibrated on the Baylor University Soil Informatics (BU-SI) data set. RF-MAP version 1.0 (RF-MAP1.0) was generated using the entire BU-SI data set (n = 685) and can predict MAP values up to 6865 mm with a RMSPE of 395 mm. RF-MAP version 2.0 (RF-MAP2.0) was generated using a modification of the BU-SI data set (n = 642) and can predict MAP values up to ∼1600 mm with a RMSPE of 209 mm. Pruned regression trees provide insight into the mechanisms driving the random forest models and demonstrate the first empirical confirmation of the sensitivity of soil elemental responses to global climate zones. The RF-MAP1.0 and RF-MAP2.0 models predict MAP values comparable to independent proxy estimates for a range of deep-time paleosols. We advocate for application of RF-MAP1.0 in settings where no a priori information on paleoclimate is available, and encourage the use of either RF-MAP1.0 or RF-MAP2.0 if users have independent constraints that paleo-MAP was below 1600 mm.

Full text Figures and data Side by side Abstract Editor's evaluation Introduction Materials and methods Results Discussion Data availability References Decision letter Author response Article and author information Metrics Abstract Background: Oxygen uptake (VO2) is one of the most important measures of fitness and critical vital sign. Cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) is a valuable method of assessing fitness in sport and clinical settings. There is a lack of large studies on athletic populations to predict VO2max using somatic or submaximal CPET variables. Thus, this study aimed to: (1) derive prediction models for maximal VO2 (VO2max) based on submaximal exercise variables at anaerobic threshold (AT) or respiratory compensation point (RCP) or only somatic and (2) internally validate provided equations. Methods: Four thousand four hundred twenty-four male endurance athletes (EA) underwent maximal symptom-limited CPET on a treadmill (n=3330) or cycle ergometer (n=1094). The cohort was randomly divided between: variables selection (nrunners = 1998; ncyclist = 656), model building (nrunners = 666; ncyclist = 219), and validation (nrunners = 666; ncyclist = 219). Random forest was used to select the most significant variables. Models were derived and internally validated with multiple linear regression. Results: Runners were 36.24±8.45 years; BMI = 23.94 ± 2.43 kg·m−2; VO2max=53.81±6.67 mL·min−1·kg−1. Cyclists were 37.33±9.13 years; BMI = 24.34 ± 2.63 kg·m−2; VO2max=51.74±7.99 mL·min−1·kg−1. VO2 at AT and RCP were the most contributing variables to exercise equations. Body mass and body fat had the highest impact on the somatic equation. Model performance for VO2max based on variables at AT was R2=0.81, at RCP was R2=0.91, at AT and RCP was R2=0.91 and for somatic-only was R2=0.43. Conclusions: Derived prediction models were highly accurate and fairly replicable. Formulae allow for precise estimation of VO2max based on submaximal exercise performance or somatic variables. Presented models are applicable for sport and clinical settling. They are a valuable supplementary method for fitness practitioners to adjust individualised training recommendations. Funding: No external funding was received for this work. Editor's evaluation The authors have established new formulas to predict maximum oxygen uptake for cyclists and runners based on submaximal exercise testing and anthropometric characteristics. This is an important study with a large and comprehensive dataset, which may be helpful for many exercise labs. The work is convincing, using appropriate and validated methodology in line with the current state-of-the-art, as shown by references to common exercise books. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.86291.sa0 Decision letter Reviews on Sciety eLife's review process Introduction The oxygen uptake (VO2) is considered an important metric in assessing cardiorespiratory fitness, health status, or endurance performance potential (Guazzi et al., 2012). With the application of standardised procedures and interpretation protocols, during graded exercise tests (GXT), the (maximal oxygen uptake) VO2max can be established (Bentley et al., 2007). GXT is the most widely used assessment to examine the dynamic relationship between exercise and integrated physiological systems (Albouaini et al., 2007; Bentley et al., 2007). The information from GXT during cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) can be applied across the spectrum of sport performance, occupational safety screening, research, and clinical diagnostics (Guazzi et al., 2017). VO2 max is often used as a boundary between severe and extreme intensity domains and by definition requires maximal effort from the tested subject (Gaesser and Poole, 1996). However, it is not always recommended or possible to undertake a test to exhaustion (Guazzi et al., 2012). For the athletes, the proximity of competition or injury history can allow submaximal testing, but not testing to exhaustion (Sassi et al., 2006). Testing that requires maximal effort may be disruptive to the training process or interfere with race performance (Coutts et al., 2007; Lamberts et al., 2011). Due to practical constraints, tests to exhaustion or peak-power-output tests are often performed only two or three times a year (Coutts et al., 2007). However, VO2 values are widely used in sport science and the decision-making process (Mann et al., 2013). VO2 is widely considered one of the major endurance performance determinants (Joyner and Coyle, 2008). Using VO2max to guide the selection process, prescribing training intensity, assessing training adaptations, or predicting race times is a common practice in high-performance sports (Bassett and Howley, 2000; Bentley et al., 2007; Hawley and Noakes, 1992; Noakes et al., 1990). VO2max is also one of the critical vital signs coordinating the function of the cardiovascular, respiratory, and muscular systems, it is an indicator of overall body health status (Kaminsky et al., 2017). Quantifying VO2max provides additional input regarding clinical decision-making, risk stratification, evaluation of therapy, and physical activity guidelines (Guazzi et al., 2012). For patients undertaking a test to exhaustion is rarely needed or possible due to health restraints or cardiac risk (Guazzi et al., 2016). For many years researchers have studied indirect methods of estimating VO2max(Sartor et al., 2013). Protocols such as the Astrand-Ryhming Test, Six-Minute Walk Test, or YMCA Step Test have been established and validated (Astrand and Ryhming, 1954; Beutner et al., 2015; Carey, 2022; Jalili et al., 2018). Moreover, estimation of the VO2 and heart rate (HR) values below the ventilatory threshold can be based on cardiorespiratory kinetics assessment using randomised changes in the work rate known as a pseudo-random binary sequences testing (Hoffmann et al., 2022). However, with the development of technology, the accessibility of laboratory testing and mobile testing improved (Montoye et al., 2020; Pritchard et al., 2021). Therefore, new opportunities to develop more precise yet simple and accessible methods and models to assess VO2max occur (Jurov et al., 2023). This appears to be especially important considering the low prediction accuracy of most of the VO2max formulae that were validated in our previous study (Wiecha et al., 2023). Recently, we have been observing the development of prediction methods with the usage of machine learning (ML) and artificial intelligence (AI) (Ashfaq et al., 2022). Both ML and AI are used in sport science as forecasting and decision-making support tools (Abut and Akay, 2015; Bobowik and Wiszomirska, 2022; Chmait and Westerbeek, 2021; Hammes et al., 2022; Rossi et al., 2021). There is growing evidence that VO2max prediction based on ML models, especially support vector ML and artificial neural network models, exhibits more robust and accurate results compared to MLR only (Abut and Akay, 2015; Ashfaq et al., 2022). Therefore, in this research, with the support of ML, we look for algorithms and prediction patterns that allow us to use values obtained during submaximal CPET and somatic measurements to estimate maximal VO2max values in male runners and cyclists. We stipulate that prediction models allow for accurate calculation of VO2max based on somatic or submaximal CPET variables. Materials and methods We have applied the development and validation of the prediction TRIPOD guidelines to conduct the study (see Supplementary Material 1TRIPOD Checklist for Prediction Model Development and Validation) (Collins et al., 2015). The study is based on retrospective data analysis from the CPET registry collected from 2013 to 2021 at the medical clinic (Sportslab, Warsaw, Poland). All CPET have been performed at the individual request of participants, as a part of regular training monitoring or performance assessment. Ethical approval Request a detailed protocol The Institutional Review Board of the Bioethical Committee at the Medical University of Warsaw (AKBE/32/2021) has approved the study protocol. The regulations of the Declaration of Helsinki were met during all parts of the study. Each study participant delivered written consent to undergo CPET and participate in the study. Derivation cohort Request a detailed protocol We selected the cohort with the use of rigorous exclusion/inclusion criteria. Due to the insufficient number of women in our database and the number of potential variables in the regression models for adequate power, we had to limit ourselves to conduct analysis in the male population only (Martens and Logan, 2021). Out of 6439 healthy, adult male cyclists and long-distance runners that undergone CPET, 4423 met the criteria as further: (1) age ≥18 years, (2) declared regular cycling or running training for ≥3 months, (3) had no extreme outliers ≤ or ≥±3 standard deviations (SD) from mean for all of the testing variables (beyond ≥±3 SD in VO2max), (4) lack of any injury, medical condition, or addiction in medical history that may affect exercise capacity, (5) not taking any medications with a modifying effect on exercise capacity, (6) maximum exertion achieved during CPET. We defined the maximum exertion in CPET as the fulfilment of the minimum six of the following criteria: (1) respiratory exchange ratio (RER) ≥1.10, (2) present VO2 plateau (growth <100 mL·min–1 in VO2 despite increased running speed or cycling power), (3) respiratory frequency (fR) ≥45 breaths·min–1, (4) declared subjective exertion intensity during CPET ≥18 in the Borg scale (Borg, 1970), (5) blood lactate concentration [La-]b ≥8 mmol·L–1, (6) growth in speed/power ≥10% of respiratory compensation point (RCP) values after exceeding the RCP, (7) peak heart rate (HRpeak) ≥15 beats·min–1 below predicted maximal heart rate (HRmax) (Lach et al., 2021). Participants’ selection procedure has been shown in Figure 1. Figure 1 Download asset Open asset Flowchart of the preliminary inclusion and exclusion process. Abbreviations: EA, endurance athlete; CPET, cardiopulmonary exercise testing; SD, standard deviation; TE, treadmill; RER, respiratory exchange ratio; VO2, oxygen uptake (mL·min−1·kg−1); [La−]b, lactate concentration (mmol·L−1); fR, breathing frequency (breaths·min−1); RCP, respiratory compensation point; HRpeak, peak heart rate (beats·min−1); HRmax, maximal heart rate (bpm). At both stages of the selection, some participants met several (>1) exclusion criteria. Somatic measurements and CPET protocols Request a detailed protocol Body mass was measured with a body composition (BC) analyser (Tanita, MC 718, Japan) with the multifrequency of 5 kHz/50 kHz/250 kHz via the bioimpedance analysis and normal testing mode. The participants’ skin was cleaned with alcohol before placing the electrodes on the skin. Prior to the test, the participants received instructions to refrain from exercising for 2 hr, consume a light meal rich in carbohydrates 2–3 hr beforehand, and maintain hydration by drinking isotonic beverages. Additionally, they were advised to abstain from medications, caffeine, and cigarettes on the day of the test. Running CPET (TE) was performed on a mechanical treadmill (h/p/Cosmos Quasar, Germany). Cycling CPET (CE) was performed on Cyclus-2 (RBM elektronik-automation GmbH, Leipzig, Germany). Hans Rudolph V2 mask (Hans Rudolph, Inc, Shawnee, KS, USA), breath-by-breath method with Cosmed Quark CPET gas exchange analysing device (Cosmed Srl, Rome, Italy), and Quark PFT Suite to Omnia 1.6 software were utilised. The gas analyser device was regularly calibrated with the reference gas (16% O2; 5% CO2) in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions (Airgas USA, LLC, Plumsteadville, PA, USA). From 2013 to 2021, three Cosmed Quark CPET units were used. HR was measured with the Cosmed torso belt (Cosmed srl, Rome, Italy). [La-]b was measured via enzymatic-amperometric electrochemical technique with Super GL2 analyser (Müller Gerätebau GmbH, Freital, Germany). The [La-]b analyser was regularly calibrated before each measurement series. The 40 m2 indoor, air-conditioned laboratory with 20–22°C temperature and 40–60% humidity, and 100 m ASL provided the same conditions for all BC and CPET. Each CPET began with a 5 min personalised warm-up (walk or easy jog with ‘conversational’ intensity for running, easy pedalling with ‘conversational’ intensity for cycling). Then after the preparation (about 5 min), the continuous progressive step test was conducted. Due to the population diversity (training status), the running test speed started from 7 to 12 km·hr–1 with a 1% treadmill incline. The choice of initial starting speed was determined by the interview and sports results achieved. For example, those running less than 60 min at a distance of 10 km started the test at 7 km/hr, while those running 10 km for less than 35 min started the test at an initial speed of 12 km/hr. The pace increased by 1 km·hr–1 every 2 min with no change in incline. The cycling test began at 60–150 W, depending on the athletes training status. The power increased by 20–30 W every 2 min. It was recommended to maintain a constant cadence of 80–90 (repetition·min–1) during the test. The tests were terminated due to exhaustion: volitional inability to continue the activity or/and VO2 and HR plateau with increasing load or/and observed disturbance of coordination in running or/and inability to maintain the set cadence. Due to the graded protocol used, the cycling power and running speed values have been calculated as a function of time to better reflect the actual level for the test moment being determined (Kuipers et al., 1985). Before the test, after every step, and 3 min after the termination of the effort technician took a 20 µL blood sample from a fingertip. Samples were collected during the test without interrupting the effort. The samples were taken from the initial puncture. The first blood drop was collected into the swab and the second blood drop was drawn for further analysis into the capillary. VO2max was recorded as the highest value (15 s intervals) before the termination of the test. HRmax was recorded as the highest value obtained at the end of the test, without averaging. The anaerobic threshold (AT) was established with the following criteria: (1) common start of VE/VO2 and VE/VCO2 curves, (2) end-tidal partial pressure of oxygen raised constantly with the end-tidal partial pressure of carbon dioxide (Beaver et al., 1986). The was established with the following criteria: (1) PetCO2 must decrease after reaching maximal amount, (2) the presence of fast nonlinear growth in VE (second deflection), (3) the VE/VCO2 ratio achieved minimum and started to rise, and (4) a nonlinear increase in VCO2 versus VO2 (lack of linearity) (Beaver et al., 1986). The [La-]b was estimated for AT and RCP in relation to power or speed (Wiecha et al., 2022). Data analysis Request a detailed protocol Our comprehensive ML approach enables the evaluation of each formula by preliminary variables precision (at the stage of selection), then accuracy (during the model’s building) and recall (in internal validation). Individual CPET results were saved into the Excel file (Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, WA, USA) and a custom-made script was used to generate the database in Excel (Python programming). Further, mean, SD, and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. The normality of the distribution of the data was examined using the Shapiro-Wilk test and intergroup differences were calculated using the Student’s t-test for independent variables. Three-step variable selection procedures based on random forests were applied using the R package VSURF in RStudio software (R Core Team, Vienna, Austria; version 3.6.4) (Genuer et al., 2016). For each level of measurement (AT, RCP) and their combination (AT+RCP), significant variables were identified separately. The first step was dedicated to eliminate irrelevant variables from the dataset. Second step aimed to select all variables related to the response for interpretation purposes. The third step refined the selection by eliminating redundancy in the set of variables selected by the second step, for prediction purposes (Genuer et al., 2017). Each time for variables selection, the anthropometric variables as in Tables 1–2 and the CPET parameters given in Tables 3–4 from a specific level of measurement (AT; RCP) and their combinations were visible. Table 1 Basic anthropometric characteristics for runners. Variable (unit)Derivation group n=1998Testing group n=666Validation group n=666MeanCISDMeanCISDMeanCISDAge (years)36.235.6–36.98.4535.935.5–36.38.0535.534.9–36.28.14Height (cm)180.0179.6–180.56.04179.4179.1–179.76.13179.7179.2–180.26.61BM (kg)77.777.0–78.49.3577.777.3–78.19.2977.977.1–78.610.1BMI (kg·m–2)23.923.8–24.12.4324.124.0–24.22.4124.123.9–24.32.56BF (%)15.415.1–15.74.5515.515.3–15.74.5215.415.1–15.84.55FM (kg)12.211.9–12.64.6812.312.1–12.54.6512.311.9–12.74.92FFM (kg)65.565.0–66.06.4365.465.1–65.76.3165.665.1–66.16.86 BM, body mass; BMI, body mass index; BF, body fat; FM, fat mass; FFM, fat-free mass; CI, 95% confidence interval; SD, standard deviation. Table 2 Basic anthropometric characteristics for cyclists. Variable (unit)Derivation group n=656Testing group n=219Validation group n=219MeanCISDMeanCISDMeanCISDAge (years)37.336.6–38.09.1337.135.9–38.49.5037.636.5–38.88.46Height (cm)179.9179.4–180.46.27180.1179.2–181.06.96180.2179.4–181.06.13BM (kg)78.878.1–79.69.8079.177.7–80.510.479.878.4–81.310.9BMI (kg·m–2)24.324.1–24.62.6324.424.0–24.72.8024.624.2–25.02.96BF (%)16.415.7–17.14.9916.115.7–16.54.8116.215.5–16.84.87FM (kg)13.312.6–14.15.6613.012.6–13.45.2713.312.5–14.05.85FFM (kg)65.864.9–66.66.2565.865.4–66.36.0666.665.7–67.46.58 BM, body mass; BMI, body mass index; BF, body fat; FM, fat mass; FFM, fat-free mass; CI, 95% confidence interval; SD, standard deviation. Table 3 Cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) characteristics for runners. Variable (unit)Derivation group n=1998Testing group n=666Validation group n=666MeanCISDMeanCISDMeanCISDrVO2AT (mL·min–1·kg–1)38.438.1–38.85.0138.538.3–38.74.8838.137.7–38.55.16RERAT0.870.86–0.870.040.870.86–0.870.040.870.86–0.870.04HRAT (beats·min–1)151.5150.8–152.310.3151.0150.6–151.510.8152.0151.2–152.810.8VEAT (L·min–1)79.178.1–80.012.278.377.8–78.912.077.276.3–78.212.0SPEEDAT (km·h–1)11.010.9–11.11.4511.011.0–11.11.3610.910.8–11.01.42LAAT (mmol·L–1)2.082.02–2.140.631.801.76–1.830.622.352.27–2.420.72rVO2RCP (mL·min–1·kg–1)47.547.0–48.05.8847.747.4–48.06.1547.346.8–47.86.16RERRCP1.001.00–1.000.041.001.00–1.000.041.001.00–1.000.03HRRCP (beats·min–1)173.4172.7–174.19.21173.2172.8–173.69.30174.3173.5–175.09.50VERCP (L·min–1)114.7113.5–116.015.9113.9113.1–114.616.7112.7111.4–114.016.2SPEEDRCP (km·h–1)14.013.9–14.11.7714.114.0–14.11.7013.913.8–14.11.75LARCP (mmol·L–1)4.724.63–4.821.044.404.34–4.451.044.814.69–4.931.14rVO2max (mL·min–1·kg–1)53.853.3–54.36.6754.354.0–54.66.9553.853.3–54.37.09 CI, 95% confidence interval; SD, standard deviation; rVO2AT, oxygen uptake at anaerobic threshold relative to body mass; RERAT, respiratory exchange ratio at anaerobic threshold; HRAT, heart rate at anaerobic threshold; VEAT, pulmonary ventilation at anaerobic threshold; SPEEDAT, velocity at anaerobic threshold; LAAT, blood lactate concentration at anaerobic threshold; rVO2RCP, oxygen uptake at respiratory compensation point relative to body mass; RERRCP, respiratory exchange ratio at respiratory compensation point; HRRCP, heart rate at respiratory compensation point; VERCP, pulmonary ventilation at respiratory compensation point; SPEEDRCP, velocity at respiratory compensation point; LARCP, blood lactate concentration at respiratory compensation point; rVO2max, maximal oxygen uptake relative to body mass. Table 4 Cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) characteristics for cyclists. Variable (unit)Derivation group n=656Testing group n=219Validation group n=219MeanCISDMeanCISDMeanCISDrVO2AT (mL·min–1·kg–1)33.032.5–33.45.8433.232.4–33.95.6833.732.9–34.55.89RERAT0.870.87–0.870.040.870.87–0.880.040.870.87–0.880.04HRAT CI, 95% confidence interval; SD, standard deviation; rVO2AT, oxygen uptake at anaerobic threshold relative to body mass; RERAT, respiratory exchange ratio at anaerobic threshold; HRAT, heart rate at anaerobic threshold; VEAT, pulmonary ventilation at anaerobic threshold; power at anaerobic threshold relative to body mass; LAAT, blood lactate concentration at anaerobic threshold; rVO2RCP, oxygen uptake at respiratory compensation point relative to body mass; RERRCP, respiratory exchange ratio at respiratory compensation point; HRRCP, heart rate at respiratory compensation point; VERCP, pulmonary ventilation at respiratory compensation point; LARCP, blood lactate concentration at respiratory compensation point; power at respiratory compensation point relative to body mass; rVO2max, maximal oxygen uptake relative to body mass. selection variables were in the further only selected parameters were into multiple linear regression The data for MLR model building were randomly into that is testing, validation and of the a only significant were in the Derived are by the of mean and mean analysis was used to the model’s precision and accuracy during validation and tests to the fulfilment of MLR test the of in MLR test assessment between and test of Each model was examined the and any have not been 2 package in RStudio (R Core Team, Vienna, Austria; version version for and software version were used in was considered as the Results Somatic measurements and CPET results data of the runners models for testing, and validation are in Table while cyclists are in Table The runners of and for testing, and validation the cyclists and differences between of runners and cyclists were in BMI and between testing in all between validation only in CPET results for runners models are in Table 3 and for cyclists in Table Runners in the cohort achieved relative to body mass VO2max of in testing group and in validation group cyclists mean was and for testing, and validation to body mass oxygen uptake at anaerobic threshold in runners for ± ± and ± of in testing, and validation it was ± ± and ± of rVO2max, relative to body mass oxygen uptake at respiratory compensation point in runners for ± ± and ± of for testing, and validation while in cyclists for ± ± and ± of rVO2max, There were no significant differences in values between testing, and validation the runners and cyclists between runners and cyclists results were all significant Prediction models based on AT and RCP Full of MLR prediction models for cyclists are in Table for runners in Table The models prediction performance is as with and for cyclists from for somatic parameters to for RCP equations. For runners from for to for AT and equations. for cyclists models was the for RCP and the highest for For from for AT and to for equation. observed for cyclists was the for RCP in the validation group and the highest for while in runners the for AT and and the highest for The performance of prediction is in Figure Figure 2 Download asset Open asset of prediction for Abbreviations: maximal oxygen anaerobic threshold; RCP, respiratory compensation point; All values are in performance for running while the performance for cycling equations. performance of the prediction model for for for AT and for somatic-only equation. Table 5 VO2max prediction for cyclists. linear regression group group = = = = based on anaerobic threshold; RCP, based on respiratory compensation point; based on somatic variables mean mean maximal oxygen uptake relative to body mass rVO2AT, oxygen uptake at anaerobic threshold relative to body mass power at anaerobic threshold relative to body mass rVO2RCP, oxygen uptake at respiratory compensation point relative to body mass VERCP, pulmonary ventilation at respiratory compensation point BF, body fat BM, body mass Table VO2max prediction for runners. linear regression group group = = = = based on anaerobic threshold; RCP, based on respiratory compensation point; based on somatic variables mean mean maximal oxygen uptake relative to body mass rVO2AT, oxygen uptake at anaerobic threshold relative to body mass SPEEDAT, velocity at anaerobic threshold FFM, fat mass VEAT, pulmonary ventilation at anaerobic threshold HRAT, heart rate at anaerobic threshold BF, body fat rVO2RCP, oxygen uptake at respiratory compensation point relative to body mass SPEEDRCP, velocity at respiratory compensation point Models validation of each model for cyclists is in Table while for runners in Table the performance of our prediction was to that observed in the

Among the Earth Observation (EO) instruments used in environmental and agricultural applications, the SPOT4-VEGETATION (SPOT4-VGT) instrument allows daily monitoring of terrestrial vegetation cover through remote sensing, at regional and global levels. The characterization of the geometric and radiometric performances of remote sensing data and their temporal stability play an important role in the analysis of EO images and are essential in environmental and agricultural monitoring applications. The validation and characterization of the SPOT4-VGT image geometric performances and temporal stability are investigated in this letter. Three time series of data acquired during 1999, 2000 and 2001 were used for this purpose. These images were downlinked by several VGT L-band receiving stations and processed by the SPACE-VGT software. From analyses made, it can be concluded that the geometric characteristics of the VGT L-band images agree with the VGT International User Committee requirements: the multispectral registration has a root mean square (RMS) error in the range of 0.25±0.17 pixels for B2, B3 and MIR bands, and 0.48±0.21 pixels for B0 band; the multi-temporal registration has a RMS error in the range of 0.38±0.23 pixels; and the absolute geo-location has a RMS error in the range of ±660 m.

Estimation of daily and total lactation milk yield of Chios ewes from single morning or evening records

All-atom molecular dynamics computer simulations were used to blindly predict the hydration free energies of a range of chloro-organic compounds as part of the SAMPL3 challenge. All compounds were parameterized within the framework of the OPLS-AA force field, using an established protocol to compute the absolute hydration free energy via a windowed free energy perturbation approach and thermodynamic integration. Three different approaches to deriving partial charge parameters were pursued: (1) using existing OPLS-AA atom types and charges with minor adjustments of partial charges on equivalent connecting atoms; (2) calculation of quantum mechanical charges via geometry optimization, followed by electrostatic potential (ESP) fitting, using Jaguar at the LMP2/cc-pVTZ(-F) level; and (3) via geometry optimization and CHelpG charges (Gaussian03 at the HF/6-31G* level), followed by two-stage RESP fitting. Protocol 3 generated the most accurate predictions with a root mean square (RMS) error of 1.2 kcal mol(-1) for the entire data set. It was found that the deficiency of the standard OPLS-AA parameters, protocol 1 (RMS error 2.4 kcal mol(-1) overall), was mostly due to compounds with more than three chlorine substituents on an aromatic ring. For this latter subset, the RMS errors were 1.4 kcal mol(-1) (protocol 3) and 4.3 kcal mol(-1) (protocol 1), respectively. We propose new OPLS-AA atom types for aromatic carbon and chlorine atoms in rings with ≥4 Cl-substituents that perform better than the best QM-based approach, resulting in an RMS error of 1.2 kcal mol(-1) for these difficult compounds.

This dataset includes input data to estimate learning-by-doing (LbD) and learning-by-researching (LbR) rates for onshore wind and solar PV in the United States. Using different learning curve approaches the simulated technology cost developments are also presented. Coefficient of determination (R square) and Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) were applied for quantification of the agreement between simulated and observed technology costs.

Development and application of a three-dimensional baroclinic model to the study of the seasonal circulation in the Celtic Sea

The aim of this study was to determine the best probability distributions for calculating the maximum annual daily precipitation with the specific probability of exceedance (Pmaxp%). The novelty of this study lies in using the peak-weighted root mean square error (PWRMSE), the root mean square error (RMSE), and the coefficient of determination (R2) for assessing the fit of empirical and theoretical distributions. The input data included maximum daily precipitation records collected in the years 1971–2014 at 51 rainfall stations from the Upper Vistula Basin, Southern Poland. The value of Pmaxp% was determined based on the following probability distributions of random variables: Pearson’s type III (PIII), Weibull’s (W), log-normal, generalized extreme value (GEV), and Gumbel’s (G). Our outcomes showed a lack of significant trends in the observation series of the investigated random variables for a majority of the rainfall stations in the Upper Vistula Basin. We found that the peak-weighted root mean square error (PWRMSE) method, a commonly used metric for quality assessment of rainfall-runoff models, is useful for identifying the statistical distributions of the best fit. In fact, our findings demonstrated the consistency of this approach with the RMSE goodness-of-fit metrics. We also identified the GEV distribution as recommended for calculating the maximum daily precipitation with the specific probability of exceedance in the catchments of the Upper Vistula Basin.

Wild blueberry yield prediction using a combination of computer simulation and machine learning algorithms

The concept of orthometric heights system determination plays a major key role in geodesy, and it has broad applications in various fields and activities. In geodesy, one significant quantity is the orthometric height, the height above or below the geoid along the gravity plumbline. Conventionally, the orthometric height is determined by gravimetry and levelling techniques. However, the aforementioned techniques has its own demerits. Thus, the error is accumulated with the increase of the propagation measurement line, it is difficult to convert two separated points which is located in two continents or islands separated by sea. These techniques are tedious, time consuming and expensive. In order to resolve this challenge, many researchers resort to various techniques and approaches of obtaining orthometric heights for an area using various mathematical models. It is in this quest that, this study seek to estimate orthometric heights of a mine by utilizing plausible alternative techniques based on artificial neural networks (ANN), multivariate adaptive regression splines (MARS), polynomial regression models and multiple linear regression (MLR). The working efficiency and performance of each model has been assessed based on statistical indicators of Mean (M), Mean Square Error (MSE), Root Mean Square Error (RMSE), Mean Bias Error (MBE), Mean Absolute Error (MAE), Standard Deviation (SD), Correlation coefficient (R), Correction of determination (R2), and Signal to Noise Ratio (SNR). The statistical findings reveal that all the models produce satisfactory results in estimating the orthometric heights in the mine. MARS and ANN models compare to the MLR and polynomial models achieved higher results in terms of accuracy with mean and standard deviation of -0.000001888 m, +2.24736 m, and +0.005835 m and 0.095063 m respectively. This study will create the opportunity for geospatial practitioners to recognize the significant of ANN, MARS, MLR, and Polynomial model in solving some of the problems in geoscientific community.

수문학, 기상학 및 기후학 등에서 필수적인 자료중의 하나인 지상기온 자료는 최근 보건, 생물, 환경 등의 다양한 분야로까지 활용영역이 확대되고 있어 그 중요성이 커지고 있으나 지상관측을 통한 지상기온자료의 취득은 시공간적인 제약이 크기 때문에 실측된 기온자료는 시공간 해상도가 낮아 높은 해상도가 요구되는 연구 분야에서는 활용성에 큰 제약을 갖게 된다. 이를 극복하기 위한 하나의 대안으로 상대적으로 높은 시공간 해상도를 가지고 있는 위성영상자료에서 얻을 수 있는 지표면온도 자료를 이용하여 지상기온을 추정하는 많은 연구들이 수행되어 왔다. 본 연구는 이러한 연구의 일환으로써 기상청에서 제공하고 있는 AWS(Automatic Weather Station)에서 취득된 2010년 지상 온도 자료(AWS data)를 바탕으로 대표적인 지표면 온도자료인 MODIS Land Surface temperature(LST data:MOD11A1)와 지상기온에 영향을 미칠 수 있는 Land Cover Data, DEM(digital elevation model) 등의 보조 자료와 함께 다양한 지구통계 기법들을 이용하여 남한 지역의 지상기온을 추정하였다. 추정 전 2010년 전체(365일) LST자료와 AWS자료와의 차이에 대한 RMSE(Root Mean Square Error)값의 계절별 피복별 분석결과 계절에 따른 RMSE값의 변동계수는 0.86으로 나타났으나 피복에 따른 변동계수는 0.00746으로 나타나 계절별 차이가 피복별 차이보다 큰 것으로 분석 되었다. 계절별 RMSE 값은 겨울철이 가장 낮은 것으로 나타났으며 AWS자료와 LST자료와 보조자료를 이용한 선형 회귀분석결과에서도 겨울철의 결정 계수가 가장 높은 0.818로 나타났으며, 여름철의 경우에는 0.078로 나타나 계절별 차이가 매우 크게 나타났다. 이러한 결과를 바탕으로 지구통계 기법들의 대표적인 방법론인 크리깅 방법 중 일반적으로 많이 사용되고 있는 정규 크리깅, 일반 크리깅, 공동 크리킹, 회귀 크리깅을 이용하여 지상기온을 추정한 후 모델의 정확도를 판단할 수 있는 교차 검증을 실시한 결과 정규 크리깅과 일반 크리깅에 의한 RMSE 값은 1.71, 공동 크리깅과 회귀 크리깅에 의한 RMSE 값은 각각 1.848, 1.63으로 나타나 회귀 크리깅 방법에 의한 추정의 정확도가 가장 높은 것으로 분석되었다. Near surface air temperature data which are one of the essential factors in hydrology, meteorology and climatology, have drawn a substantial amount of attention from various academic domains and societies. Meteorological observations, however, have high spatio-temporal constraints with the limits in the number and distribution over the earth surface. To overcome such limits, many studies have sought to estimate the near surface air temperature from satellite image data at a regional or continental scale with simple regression methods. Alternatively, we applied various Kriging methods such as ordinary Kriging, universal Kriging, Cokriging, Regression Kriging in search of an optimal estimation method based on near surface air temperature data observed from automatic weather stations (AWS) in South Korea throughout 2010 (365 days) and MODIS land surface temperature (LST) data (MOD11A1, 365 images). Due to high spatial heterogeneity, auxiliary data have been also analyzed such as land cover, DEM (digital elevation model) to consider factors that can affect near surface air temperature. Prior to the main estimation, we calculated root mean square error (RMSE) of temperature differences from the 365-days LST and AWS data by season and landcover. The results show that the coefficient of variation (CV) of RMSE by season is 0.86, but the equivalent value of CV by landcover is 0.00746. Seasonal differences between LST and AWS data were greater than that those by landcover. Seasonal RMSE was the lowest in winter (3.72). The results from a linear regression analysis for examining the relationship among AWS, LST, and auxiliary data show that the coefficient of determination was the highest in winter (0.818) but the lowest in summer (0.078), thereby indicating a significant level of seasonal variation. Based on these results, we utilized a variety of Kriging techniques to estimate the surface temperature. The results of cross-validation in each Kriging model show that the measure of model accuracy was 1.71, 1.71, 1.848, and 1.630 for universal Kriging, ordinary Kriging, cokriging, and regression Kriging, respectively. The estimates from regression Kriging thus proved to be the most accurate among the Kriging methods compared.

With the rapid development of China’s industrialization, air pollution is becoming more and more serious. Predicting air quality is essential for identifying further preventive measures to avoid negative impacts. The existing prediction of atmospheric pollutant concentration ignores the problem of feature redundancy and spatio-temporal characteristics; the accuracy of the model is not high, the mobility of it is not strong. Therefore, firstly, extreme gradient lifting (XGBoost) is applied to extract features from PM2.5, then one-dimensional multi-scale convolution kernel (MSCNN) is used to extract local temporal and spatial feature relations from air quality data, and linear splicing and fusion is carried out to obtain the spatio-temporal feature relationship of multi-features. Finally, XGBoost and MSCNN combine the advantages of LSTM in dealing with time series. Genetic algorithm (GA) is applied to optimize the parameter set of long-term and short-term memory network (LSTM) network. The spatio-temporal relationship of multi-features is input into LSTM network, and then the long-term feature dependence of multi-feature selection is output to predict PM2.5 concentration. A XGBoost-MSCGL of PM2.5 concentration prediction model based on spatio-temporal feature selection is established. The data set comes from the hourly concentration data of six kinds of atmospheric pollutants and meteorological data in Fen-Wei Plain in 2020. To verify the effectiveness of the model, the XGBoost-MSCGL model is compared with the benchmark models such as multilayer perceptron (MLP), CNN, LSTM, XGBoost, CNN-LSTM with before and after using XGBoost feature selection. According to the forecast results of 12 cities, compared with the single model, the root mean square error (RMSE) decreased by about 39.07%, the average MAE decreased by about 42.18%, the average MAE decreased by about 49.33%, but R2 increased by 23.7%. Compared with the model after feature selection, the root mean square error (RMSE) decreased by an average of about 15%. On average, the MAPE decreased by 16%, the MAE decreased by 21%, and R2 increased by 2.6%. The experimental results show that the XGBoost-MSCGL prediction model offer a more comprehensive understanding, runs deeper levels, guarantees a higher prediction accuracy, and ensures a better generalization ability in the prediction of PM2.5 concentration.

Background and purposeThe study evaluated the differences in leaf positioning deviations by the log files of three advanced accelerators with two delivery techniques, and established specific assessment parameters of leaf positioning deviations for different types of accelerators.MethodsA total of 420 treatment plans with 5 consecutive treatment log files were collected from the Trilogy, TrueBeam and Halcyon accelerators. Millennium MLC was equipped on the Trilogy and TrueBeam accelerators. A jawless design and dual-layer MLC were adopted on the Halcyon accelerator. 70 IMRT and 70 VMAT plans were selected randomly on each accelerator. The treatment sites of all plans included head and neck, chest, breast, pelvis and other sites. The parsing tasks for 2100 log files were proceeded by SunCheck software from Sun Nuclear Corporation. The maximum leaf root mean square (RMS) errors, 95th percentile errors and percentages of different leaf positioning errors were statistically analyzed. The correlations between these evaluation parameters and accelerator performance parameters (maximum leaf speed, mean leaf speed, gantry and arc angle) were analyzed.ResultsThe average maximum leaf RMS errors of the Trilogy in the IMRT and VMAT plans were 0.44 ± 0.09 mm and 0.79 ± 0.07 mm, respectively, which were higher than the TrueBeam's 0.03 ± 0.01 mm, 0.03 ± 0.01 mm and the Halcyon's 0.05 ± 0.01 mm, 0.07 ± 0.01 mm. Similar data results were shown in the 95th percentile error. The maximum leaf RMS errors were strongly correlated with the 95th percentile errors (Pearson index > 0.5). The leaf positioning deviations in VMAT were higher than those in IMRT for all accelerators. In TrueBeam and Halcyon, leaf position errors above 1 mm were not found in IMRT and VMAT plans. The main influencing factor of leaf positioning deviation was the leaf speed, which has no strong correlation with gantry and arc angles.ConclusionsCompared with the quality assurance guidelines, the MLC positioning deviations tolerances of the three accelerators should be tightened. For both IMRT and VMAT techniques, the 95th percentile error and the maximum RMS error are suggested to be tightened to 1.5 and 1 mm respectively for the Trilogy accelerator. In TrueBeam and Halcyon accelerators, the 95th percentile error and maximum RMS error of 1 and 0.5 mm, respectively, are considered appropriate.