Life sciences · Preprint
arXiv · November 2, 2026
No summary has been generated for this record yet. What follows is drawn from its source metadata only.
Preprint.
No findings were extractable from the material analysed.
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
The source did not state who this applies to in practice.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
This record has not been graded across any dimension yet. Treat the label above as provisional and read the source.
What is missing. This record has no bottom line, key findings, reported figures, evidence dimensions. That is a gap in the analysis, not a judgement about the study.
For effective resource management, infrastructure planning, and sustainable tourism, it is really important to predict accurate visitors. This paper estimates the daily visitation of Nebraska lakes using spatial, basic temporal, and interpretable temporal features. Moreover, we evaluate the base models with multiple metrics. Using the best three models, our method will ensemble hybrid models and choose the best hybrid technique. Further, we investigate the impact of lag features and how the models work with different outlier detection techniques such as Interquartile Range (IQR) and anomaly detection. The models are evaluated using regression metrics (MAE, MSE, RMSE, MAPE, and R2). Experiment results show that, after removing anomalies, MAE, MSE, RMSE, and MAPE are reduced. Adding lag features also shows some positive effects on the results. Moreover, anomaly detection techniques perform better than IQR in improving performance while preserving data. The reported anomaly-based cross-validation results favored the voting ensemble over the compared base models on the evaluated metrics. In anomaly-based cross-validation, VOTE improved prediction errors compared with MLP (256,128,64); improvements varied in the single-split comparison. Specifically, the hybrid model reduced MAE by 9.82%, MSE by 3.12%, RMSE by 1.76%, and MAPE by 6.77%. In the reported cross-validation comparison, the best anomaly-based hybrid model had lower MAE, MSE, RMSE, and MAPE than the best IQR-based hybrid model by 9.81%, 34.30%, 18.99%, and 0.66%, respectively.