基于关联向量机回归的水质预测模型

提出了一种基于关联向量机回归的水质时间序列预测模型,并以该模型对氢离子浓度指数(p H值)、溶解氧(DO)、高锰酸盐指数(CODMn)和氨氮(NH3-N)4种重要水质指标进行预测.首先采用国家环保部发布的四川攀枝花龙洞水质自动监测数据进行实验,对该模型的有效性进行了验证;然后将关联向量机回归预测模型与支持向量机回归预测模型进行比较.为了比较不同核函数的预测效果,实验中预测模型的核函数分别采用了线性函数和高斯函数.实验结果表明,关联向量机回归模型的预测效果不亚于支持向量机回归模型;且在给出预测值时,还能同时给出预测结果的可信程度.     

A mixed methodology for evaluating use of evidence in conservation planning

Conservation practitioners widely recognize the importance of making decisions based on the best available evidence. However, the effectiveness of evidence use in conservation planning is rarely assessed, which limits opportunities to improve evidence-based practice. We devised a mixed methodology for empirically evaluating use of evidence that applies social science tools to systematically appraise what kinds of evidence are used in conservation planning, to what effect, and under what limitations. We applied our approach in a case study of the Nature Conservancy of Canada (NCC), a leading land conservation organization. We conducted qualitative and quantitative analyses of 65 NCC planning documents (n = 13 in-depth) to identify patterns in evidence use, and surveyed 35 conservation planners to examine experiences of and barriers to using evidence. Although claims in plans contained a wide range of evidence types, 26% of claims were not referenced or associated with an identifiable source. Lack of evidence use was particularly apparent in claims associated with direct threats, particularly those identified as low (71% coded as insufficient or lacking evidence) or medium (45%) threats. Survey participants described relying heavily on practitioner experience and highlighted capacity limitations and disciplinary gaps in expertise among planning teams as barriers to using evidence effectively. We found that although time-intensive, this approach yielded actionable recommendations for improving evidence use in NCC conservation plans. Similar mixed-method assessments may streamline the process by including interviews and refining the document analysis frames to target issues or sections of concern. We suggest our method provides an accessible and robust point of departure for conservation practitioners to evaluate whether the use of conservation planning reflects in-house standards and more broadly recognized best practices.