Inverse problem for Lagrangian systems on Lie algebroids and applications to reduction by symmetries

The language of Lagrangian submanifolds is used to extend a geometric characterization of the inverse problem of the calculus of variations on tangent bundles to regular Lie algebroids. Since not all closed sections are locally exact on Lie algebroids, the Helmholtz conditions on Lie algebroids are necessary but not sufficient, so they give a weaker definition of the inverse problem. As an application the Helmholtz conditions on Atiyah algebroids are obtained so that the relationship between the inverse problem and the reduced inverse problem by symmetries can be described. Some examples and comparison with previous approaches in the literature are provided.Comment: Comments welcome

Analytical Method Validation as the First Step in Drug Quality Control

The authors have developed and validated some chromatographic methods with the aim of quantifying drugs as drug substance and drug product, suitable for stability and quality control studies, as at original products as at its remainder doses. The stability of a pharmaceutical is defined by its resistance to different chemical, physical, and microbiological reactions that may change their original properties. The stability of a pharmaceutical product is closely related to its potency; therefore, whether the compounds are degraded, a decrease of the therapeutic effect or changes in their toxicological properties can be produced, affecting their efficacy and safety, which becomes important to maintain a stable pharmaceutical product and to have the analytical tools to demonstrate stability. Therefore, stability-indicating methods are required to the quality control of pharmaceuticals. Analytical methods presented here are useful stability-indicating methods to analyze drugs and have adequate linearity, precision, accuracy, selectivity, and LOD/LOQ values. The examples presented here are stability-indicating methods since they allow the determination of drugs in the presence of their degradation products, according to the International Conference on Harmonization (ICH) guidelines

Attributes for assessing the environmental quality of riparian zones

Seven attributes of riparian systems are proposed to be considered for assessing the ecological status of riparian zones. They can be easily evaluated by taking into consideration some features of the structure and functioning of riverine systems, largely determined by their hydromorphological dynamics. The structure of riparian zones could be characterized by the longitudinal continuity of vegetation, the lateral dimensions (width) of the channel containing natural riparian vegetation and the composition and structure of riparian vegetation communities. These attributes basically define the morphology of riparian areas, reflecting a static view of the river. They also define the spatial dimensions where riparian functions take place, indicating the possibilities of carrying on riparian restoration activities at short time scales.The functioning of riparian systems may be assessed considering the ratio of natural woody species regeneration, bank conditions, lateral connectivity and permeability of riparian soils. These attributes indicate the temporal behaviour of riparian zones, that is showed in a more dynamic or video view of the river. They are more related to the potential of achieving riparian restoration at longer time scales, representing key elements to guarantee the self-maintenance of fluvial processes and riparian biodiversity. The aforementioned attributes provide a framework to assess the ecological status of riparian zones, and offer a minimum checklist of criteria to evaluate strategies for restoring and preserving river ecosystems.El estado ecológico de las riberas fluviales puede quedar caracterizado a través de siete atributos. Dichos atributos pueden ser fácilmente evaluados teniendo en cuenta diferentes aspectos de la estructura y del funcionamiento de los sistemas riparios, los cuales están fuertemente determinados por la dinámica hidromorfológica fluvial. La estructura de las riberas queda caracterizada por la continuidad longitudinal de la vegetación, las dimensiones laterales (anchura) del espacio fluvial conteniendo vegetación riparia natural y la composición y estructura de las comunidades vegetales riparias. Estos atributos definen básicamente la morfología de las riberas, y quedan reflejados en una visión estática o fotografía del río. A su vez, dichos atributos definen las dimensiones espaciales donde tienen lugar las funciones riparias, e indican las posibilidades de llevar a cabo la restauración fluvial a corto plazo. El funcionamiento de los sistemas riparios queda reflejado a través de la tasa de regeneración natural de las especies leñosas riparias, la condición de las orillas, la conectividad lateral del cauce con sus riberas y la permeabilidad de los suelos riparios. Estos atributos indican el comportamiento en el tiempo de las riberas, y su evaluación requiere una visión dinámica, reflejada en un vídeo del río. Dichos atributos están más relacionados con las posibilidades de lograr la restauración fluvial a más largo plazo, representando elementos claves para garantizar la sostenibilidad de los procesos fluviales y la biodiversidad de los sistemas riparios. Los atributos mencionados representan en su conjunto un esquema para evaluar el estado ecológico de las riberas fluviales, y sirven como criterios para evaluar las propuestas de estrategias de restauración y conservación de los ecosistemas fluviales

Dashboards and visualisation tools for enhancing creativity in business master students

[EN] Dashboards are a basic element in Data Science. Well planned dashboards help the staff of a company at all levels of the organization. They allow them to ask questions and respond them in real time. As a result, this information allows them to make appropriate decisions and facilitates innovation. A fundamental component in the dashboards are the visualizations by means of dynamic graphic objects that can be explored. These visualizations must be analyzed dynamically so that business master students can intuitively arrive at a series of insights that bring them closer to the nature of the problems. Learning by doing and consulting. We are going to use a dashboard about innovation elaborated by Bankinter Fundation in the Platform Google Data Analytics. The proposed teaching dynamic includes the formation of work teams of 5-7 students. The challenge start when each group pose several questions to the rest of the teams. To answer these questions the students must consult the proposed dashboard. There is a time limit to answer each question. The winner is the team that answers correctly more questions and explains the way to obtain this information. This way, students get used to dashboards and visualisation tools and start learning with a good dashboard model that prepares them to later select and design proper tools. As a further result, we have appreciated that using visualisation in teaching can increase student engagement and performance.González-Ladrón-De-Guevara, F.; Fernández-Diego, M. (2021). Dashboards and visualisation tools for enhancing creativity in business master students. IATED. 8799-8804. https://doi.org/10.21125/inted.2021.1836S8799880

Potential and limitations of the ISBSG dataset in enhancing software engineering research: A mapping review

Context The International Software Benchmarking Standards Group (ISBSG) maintains a software development repository with over 6000 software projects. This dataset makes it possible to estimate a project s size, effort, duration, and cost. Objective The aim of this study was to determine how and to what extent, ISBSG has been used by researchers from 2000, when the first papers were published, until June of 2012. Method A systematic mapping review was used as the research method, which was applied to over 129 papers obtained after the filtering process. Results The papers were published in 19 journals and 40 conferences. Thirty-five percent of the papers published between years 2000 and 2011 have received at least one citation in journals and only five papers have received six or more citations. Effort variable is the focus of 70.5% of the papers, 22.5% center their research in a variable different from effort and 7% do not consider any target variable. Additionally, in as many as 70.5% of papers, effort estimation is the research topic, followed by dataset properties (36.4%). The more frequent methods are Regression (61.2%), Machine Learning (35.7%), and Estimation by Analogy (22.5%). ISBSG is used as the only support in 55% of the papers while the remaining papers use complementary datasets. The ISBSG release 10 is used most frequently with 32 references. Finally, some benefits and drawbacks of the usage of ISBSG have been highlighted. Conclusion This work presents a snapshot of the existing usage of ISBSG in software development research. ISBSG offers a wealth of information regarding practices from a wide range of organizations, applications, and development types, which constitutes its main potential. However, a data preparation process is required before any analysis. Lastly, the potential of ISBSG to develop new research is also outlined.Fernández Diego, M.; González-Ladrón-De-Guevara, F. (2014). Potential and limitations of the ISBSG dataset in enhancing software engineering research: A mapping review. Information and Software Technology. 56(6):527-544. doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2014.01.003S52754456

Application of mutual information-based sequential feature selection to ISBSG mixed data

[EN] There is still little research work focused on feature selection (FS) techniques including both categorical and continuous features in Software Development Effort Estimation (SDEE) literature. This paper addresses the problem of selecting the most relevant features from ISBSG (International Software Benchmarking Standards Group) dataset to be used in SDEE. The aim is to show the usefulness of splitting the ranked list of features provided by a mutual information-based sequential FS approach in two, regarding categorical and continuous features. These lists are later recombined according to the accuracy of a case-based reasoning model. Thus, four FS algorithms are compared using a complete dataset with 621 projects and 12 features from ISBSG. On the one hand, two algorithms just consider the relevance, while the remaining two follow the criterion of maximizing relevance and also minimizing redundancy between any independent feature and the already selected features. On the other hand, the algorithms that do not discriminate between continuous and categorical features consider just one list, whereas those that differentiate them use two lists that are later combined. As a result, the algorithms that use two lists present better performance than those algorithms that use one list. Thus, it is meaningful to consider two different lists of features so that the categorical features may be selected more frequently. We also suggest promoting the usage of Application Group, Project Elapsed Time, and First Data Base System features with preference over the more frequently used Development Type, Language Type, and Development Platform.Fernández-Diego, M.; González-Ladrón-De-Guevara, F. (2018). Application of mutual information-based sequential feature selection to ISBSG mixed data. Software Quality Journal. 26(4):1299-1325. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11219-017-9391-5S12991325264Angelis, L., & Stamelos, I. (2000). A simulation tool for efficient analogy based cost estimation. Empirical Software Engineering, 5(1), 35–68. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009897800559 .Auer, M., Trendowicz, A., Graser, B., Haunschmid, E., & Biffl, S. (2006). Optimal project feature weights in analogy-based cost estimation: improvement and limitations. Software Engineering, IEEE Transactions on, 32(2), 83–92.Awada, W., Khoshgoftaar, T. M., Dittman, D., Wald, R., Napolitano, A. (2012). A review of the stability of feature selection techniques for bioinformatics data. In 2012 I.E. 13th International Conference on Information Reuse and Integration (IRI) (pp. 356–363). Presented at the 2012 I.E. 13th International Conference on Information Reuse and Integration (IRI). https://doi.org/10.1109/IRI.2012.6303031 .Battiti, R. (1994). Using mutual information for selecting features in supervised neural net learning. Neural Networks, IEEE Transactions, 5(4), 537–550.Bennasar, M., Hicks, Y., & Setchi, R. (2015). Feature selection using joint mutual information maximisation. Expert Systems with Applications, 42(22), 8520–8532. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2015.07.007 .Bibi, S., Tsoumakas, G., Stamelos, I., & Vlahavas, I. (2008). Regression via classification applied on software defect estimation. Expert Systems with Applications, 34(3), 2091–2101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2007.02.012 .Chandrashekar, G., & Sahin, F. (2014). A survey on feature selection methods. Computers & Electrical Engineering, 40(1), 16–28.Chatzipetrou, P., Papatheocharous, E., Angelis, L., Andreou, A. S. (2012). An investigation of software effort phase distribution using compositional data analysis. In 2012 38th EUROMICRO Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications (SEAA) (pp. 367–375). Presented at the 2012 38th EUROMICRO Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications (SEAA). https://doi.org/10.1109/SEAA.2012.50 .Chen, Z., Menzies, T., Port, D., & Boehm, B. (2005). Feature subset selection can improve software cost estimation accuracy. In Proceedings of the 2005 workshop on predictor models in software engineering (pp. 1–6). New York: ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/1082983.1083171 .Chiu, N.-H., & Huang, S.-J. (2007). The adjusted analogy-based software effort estimation based on similarity distances. Journal of Systems and Software, 80(4), 628–640.Dash, M., & Liu, H. (2003). Consistency-based search in feature selection. Artificial Intelligence, 151(1), 155–176.Dejaeger, K., Verbeke, W., Martens, D., & Baesens, B. (2012). Data mining techniques for software effort estimation: a comparative study. Software Engineering, IEEE Transactions on, 38(2), 375–397. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSE.2011.55 .Deng, K., & MacDonell, S. G. (2008). Maximising data retention from the ISBSG repository. In Proceedings of the 12th international conference on evaluation and assessment in software engineering (pp. 21–30). Swinton: British Computer Society http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2227115.2227118 . Accessed 21 Jan 2014.Doquire, G., & Verleysen, M. (2011). An hybrid approach to feature selection for mixed categorical and continuous data. In International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Information Retrieval. http://hdl.handle.net/2078.1/90765 . Accessed 2 Nov 2015.Dudani, S. A. (1976). The distance-weighted k-nearest-neighbor rule. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, SMC, 6(4), 325–327. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSMC.1976.5408784 .Estévez, P. A., Tesmer, M., Perez, C. A., & Zurada, J. M. (2009). Normalized mutual information feature selection. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks, 20(2), 189–201. https://doi.org/10.1109/TNN.2008.2005601 .Fayyad, U.M., & Irani, K.B. (1993). Multi-Interval Discretization of Continuous-Valued Attributes for Classification Learning. In Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Uncertainty in AI (pp. 1022–1027). Presented at the International Joint Conference on Uncertainty in AI. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/220815890_Multi-Interval_Discretization_of_Continuous-Valued_Attributes_for_Classification_Learning . Accessed 22 June 2016.Fernández-Diego, M., & González-Ladrón-de-Guevara, F. (2014). Potential and limitations of the ISBSG dataset in enhancing software engineering research: a mapping review. Information and Software Technology, 56(6), 527–544. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2014.01.003 .Ferreira, A., & Figueiredo, M. (2011). Unsupervised joint feature discretization and selection. In J. Vitrià, J. M. Sanches, & M. Hernández (Eds.), Pattern recognition and image analysis (Vol. 6669, pp. 200–207). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg http://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-3-642-21257-4_25 . Accessed 4 Mar 2016.Fleuret, F. (2004). Fast binary feature selection with conditional mutual information. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 5, 1531–1555.González-Ladrón-de-Guevara, F., Fernández-Diego, M., & Lokan, C. (2016). The usage of ISBSG data fields in software effort estimation: a systematic mapping study. Journal of Systems and Software, 113, 188–215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2015.11.040 .Gupta, P., Jain, S., & Jain, A. (2014). A review of fast clustering-based feature subset selection algorithm. International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research, 3(11), 86–91.Guyon, I., & Elisseeff, A. (2003). An introduction to variable and feature selection. The Journal of Machine Learning Research, 3, 1157–1182.Hall, M. A., & Holmes, G. (2003). Benchmarking attribute selection techniques for discrete class data mining. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 15(6), 1437–1447. https://doi.org/10.1109/TKDE.2003.1245283 .Hausser, J., & Strimmer, K. (2009). Entropy inference and the James-Stein estimator, with application to nonlinear gene association networks. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 10(Jul), 1469–1484.Hill, P. (2010). Practical software project estimation: a toolkit for estimating software development effort & duration. McGraw Hill Professional.Hsu, H.-H., Hsieh, C.-W., & Lu, M.-D. (2011). Hybrid feature selection by combining filters and wrappers. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(7), 8144–8150.Huang, S.-J., & Chiu, N.-H. (2006). Optimization of analogy weights by genetic algorithm for software effort estimation. Information and Software Technology, 48(11), 1034–1045. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2005.12.020 .Huang, S.-J., Chiu, N.-H., & Liu, Y.-J. (2008). A comparative evaluation on the accuracies of software effort estimates from clustered data. Information and Software Technology, 50(9–10), 879–888. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2008.02.005 .Huang, J., Li, Y.-F., & Xie, M. (2015). An empirical analysis of data preprocessing for machine learning-based software cost estimation. Information and Software Technology, 67, 108–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2015.07.004 .ISBSG. (2013a). ISBSG Dataset Release 12. ISBSG. http://isbsg.org/ . Accessed 1 Mar 2016.ISBSG. (2013b). ISBSG Guidelines Release 12.ISBSG. (2013c). ISBSG Data Demographics Release 12.Jeffery, R., Ruhe, M., Wieczorek, I. (2001). Using public domain metrics to estimate software development effort. In Software Metrics Symposium, 2001. METRICS 2001. Proceedings. Seventh International (pp. 16–27). https://doi.org/10.1109/METRIC.2001.915512 .Jiang, Z., & Comstock, C. (2007). The factors significant to software development productivity. In C. Ardil (Ed.), Proceedings of World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, Vol 19 (Vol. 19, pp. 160–164). Presented at the Conference of the World-Academy-of-Science-Engineering-and-Technology, Bangkok: World Acad Sci, Eng & Tech-Waset.Jørgensen, M., Indahl, U., & Sjøberg, D. (2003). Software effort estimation by analogy and ‘regression toward the mean’. Journal of Systems and Software, 68(3), 253–262. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0164-1212(03)00066-9 .Kabir, M. M., Shahjahan, M., & Murase, K. (2011). A new local search based hybrid genetic algorithm for feature selection. Neurocomputing, 74(17), 2914–2928.Kadoda, G., Cartwright, M., Chen, L., Shepperd, M. (2000). Experiences using case-based reasoning to predict software project effort. In EASE 2000 (pp. 2–3). Presented at the EASE 2000, Staffordshire, UK.Keung, J., Kocaguneli, E., & Menzies, T. (2012). Finding conclusion stability for selecting the best effort predictor in software effort estimation. Automated Software Engineering, 20(4), 543–567. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10515-012-0108-5 .Kirsopp, C., Shepperd, M. J., Hart, J. (2002). Search heuristics, case-based reasoning and software project effort prediction. In Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (pp. 9–13). New York, USA. http://v-scheiner.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/1554 . Accessed 27 Jan 2016.Kohavi, R., & John, G. H. (1997). Wrappers for feature subset selection. Artificial Intelligence, 97(1–2), 273–324. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0004-3702(97)00043-X .Kwak, N., & Choi, C.-H. (2002). Input feature selection for classification problems. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks, 13(1), 143–159. https://doi.org/10.1109/72.977291 .Langdon, W. B., Dolado, J., Sarro, F., & Harman, M. (2016). Exact mean absolute error of baseline predictor, MARP0. Information and Software Technology, 73, 16–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2016.01.003 .Li, Y. F., Xie, M., & Goh, T. N. (2009). A study of mutual information based feature selection for case based reasoning in software cost estimation. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(3), 5921–5931.Liu, H., & Motoda, H. (2012). Feature selection for knowledge discovery and data mining (Vol. 454). Springer Science & Business Media. https://books.google.es/books?hl=en&lr=&id=aaDbBwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP10&dq=Feature+selection+for+knowledge+discovery+and+data+mining&ots=iuMhcWZGcf&sig=KlmNEIcsBdDVs-m1HUuICfpYZiM . Accessed 25 Jan 2016.Liu, H., & Yu, L. (2005). Toward integrating feature selection algorithms for classification and clustering. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 17(4), 491–502. https://doi.org/10.1109/TKDE.2005.66 .Liu, H., Wei, R., & Jiang, G. (2013). A hybrid feature selection scheme for mixed attributes data. Computational and Applied Mathematics, 32(1), 145–161. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40314-013-0019-5 .Liu, Q., Wang, J., Xiao, J., Zhu, H. (2014). Mutual information based feature selection for symbolic interval data. In International Conference on Software Intelligence Technologies and Applications International Conference on Frontiers of Internet of Things 2014 (pp. 62–69). Presented at the International Conference on Software Intelligence Technologies and Applications International Conference on Frontiers of Internet of Things 2014. https://doi.org/10.1049/cp.2014.1537 .Lokan, C. (2005). What should you optimize when building an estimation model? In Software Metrics, 2005. 11th IEEE International Symposium (pp. 1–10). https://doi.org/10.1109/METRICS.2005.55 .Lokan, C., & Mendes, E. (2009a). Investigating the use of chronological split for software effort estimation. Software, IET, 3(5), 422–434. https://doi.org/10.1049/iet-sen.2008.0107 .Lokan, C., & Mendes, E. (2009b). Applying moving windows to software effort estimation. In Proceedings of the 2009 3rd international symposium on empirical software engineering and measurement (pp. 111–122). Washington, DC: IEEE Computer Society. https://doi.org/10.1109/ESEM.2009.5316019 .Lokan, C., & Mendes, E. (2012). Investigating the use of duration-based moving windows to improve software effort prediction. In Software Engineering Conference (APSEC), 2012 19th Asia-Pacific (Vol. 1, pp. 818–827). Presented at the Software Engineering Conference (APSEC), 2012 19th Asia-Pacific. https://doi.org/10.1109/APSEC.2012.74 .Lustgarten, J.L., Visweswaran, S., Grover, H., Gopalakrishnan, V. (2008). An evaluation of discretization methods for learning rules from biomedical datasets. In BIOCOMP (pp. 527–532).Mandal, M., & Mukhopadhyay, A. (2013). An improved minimum redundancy maximum relevance approach for feature selection in gene expression data. Procedia Technology, 10, 20–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.protcy.2013.12.332 .Mendes, E., Watson, I., Triggs, C., Mosley, N., & Counsell, S. (2003). A comparative study of cost estimation models for web hypermedia applications. Empirical Software Engineering, 8(2), 163–196.Mendes, E., Lokan, C., Harrison, R., Triggs, C. (2005). A replicated comparison of cross-company and within-company effort estimation models using the ISBSG database. In Software Metrics, 2005. 11th IEEE International Symposium (pp. 1–10). https://doi.org/10.1109/METRICS.2005.4 .Moses, J., Farrow, M., Parrington, N., & Smith, P. (2006). A productivity benchmarking case study using Bayesian credible intervals. Software Quality Journal, 14(1), 37–52. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11219-006-6000-4 .Núñez, H., Sànchez-Marrè, M., Cortés, U., Comas, J., Martínez, M., Rodríguez-Roda, I., & Poch, M. (2004). A comparative study on the use of similarity measures in case-based reasoning to improve the classification of environmental system situations. Environmental Modelling & Software, 19(9), 809–819. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2003.03.003 .Oh, I.-S., Lee, J.-S., & Moon, B.-R. (2004). Hybrid genetic algorithms for feature selection. Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, IEEE Transactions on, 26(11), 1424–1437.Peng, H., Long, F., & Ding, C. (2005). Feature selection based on mutual information criteria of max-dependency, max-relevance, and min-redundancy. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 27(8), 1226–1238. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPAMI.2005.159 .R Core Team. (2015). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing https://www.R-project.org/ .Romanski, P., & Kotthoff, L. (2014). FSelector: Selecting attributes. R package version 0.20. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=FSelector .Shannon, C. E. (1949). The mathematical theory of communication. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Shepperd, M., & MacDonell, S. (2012). Evaluating prediction systems in software project estimation. Information and Software Technology, 54(8), 820–827.Shepperd, M., & Schofield, C. (1997). Estimating software project effort using analogies. Software Engineering, IEEE Transactions on, 23(11), 736–743.Somol, P., Pudil, P., & Kittler, J. (2004). Fast branch & bound algorithms for optimal feature selection. Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, IEEE Transactions on, 26(7), 900–912.Song, Q., & Shepperd, M. (2007). A new imputation method for small software project data sets. Journal of Systems and Software, 80(1), 51–62.Top, O. O., Ozkan, B., Nabi, M., Demirors, O. (2011). Internal and External Software Benchmark Repository Utilization for Effort Estimation. In Software Measurement, 2011 Joint Conference of the 21st Int’l Workshop on and 6th Int’l Conference on Software Process and Product Measurement (IWSM-MENSURA) (pp. 302–307). https://doi.org/10.1109/IWSM-MENSURA.2011.41 .Vinh, L.T., Thang, N.D., Lee, Y.-K. (2010). An improved maximum relevance and minimum redundancy feature selection algorithm based on normalized mutual information. In 2010 10th IEEE/IPSJ International Symposium on Applications and the Internet (SAINT) (pp. 395–398). Presented at the 2010 10th IEEE/IPSJ International Symposium on Applications and the Internet (SAINT). https://doi.org/10.1109/SAINT.2010.50 .Witten, I.H., Frank, E., Hall, M.A., Pal, C.J. (2011). Data mining: Practical machine learning tools and techniques. Morgan Kaufmann

Integrated methodology for assessing the effects of geomorphological river restoration on fish habitat and riparian vegetation

Changes in the geomorphology of rivers have serious repercussions, causing losses in the dynamics and naturalness of their forms, going in many cases, from a type of meandering channel, with constant erosion and sedimentation processes, to a channelized narrow river with rigid and stable margins, where the only possibility of movement occurs in the vertical, causing the only changes in channel geometry occur in the river bed. On the other hand, these changes seriously affect the naturalness of the banks, preventing the development of riparian vegetation and reducing the cross connectivity of the riparian corridor. Common canalizations and disconnections of meanders increase the slope, and therefore speed, resulting in processes of regressive erosion, effect increased as a result of the narrowing of the channel and the concentration of flows. This process of incision may turn the flood plain to be "hung", being completely disconnected from the water table, with important consequences for vegetation. As an example of the effects of these changes, it has been chosen the case of the Arga River The Arga river has been channelized and rectified, as it passes along the meander RamalHondo and Soto Gil (Funes, Navarra). The effects on fish habitat and riparian vegetation by remeandering the Arga River are presented. and Ttwo very contrasting situationsrestoration hypothesis, in terms of geomorphology concerns, have been established to assess the effects these changes have on the habitat of one of the major fish species in the area (Luciobabus graellsii) and on the riparian vegetation. To accomplish this goal, it has been necessary to used the a digital elevation model provided by LIDAR flight, bathymetric data, flow data, as inputs, and a hydraulic simulation model 2D (Infoworks RS). The results obtained not only helped to evaluate the effects of the past alterations of geomorphologic characteristics, but also to predict fish and vegetation habitat responses to this type of changes