Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Monthly streamflow prediction and performance comparison of machine learning and deep learning methods
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Monthly streamflow prediction and performance comparison of machine learning and deep learning methods
Do you wish to request the book?
Monthly streamflow prediction and performance comparison of machine learning and deep learning methods
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Monthly streamflow prediction and performance comparison of machine learning and deep learning methods
2023
Overview
Streamflow prediction is an important matter for the water resources management and the design of hydraulic structures that can be built on rivers. Recently, it has become a widely studied research field where data obtained from stream gauge stations can be utilized for creating estimating models by resorting to different methods such as machine and deep learning techniques. In this study, we performed monthly streamflow predictions by using the following data-driven methods of machine learning: linear regression, support vector regression, random forest and deep learning (DL) models to compare the performances of ML's and DL's techniques. A general workflow that can be applied to similar regions is presented. An estimating model containing six-input combinations and time-lagged streamflow data is improved by means of the autocorrelation function (ACF) and partial autocorrelation function (PACF). Furthermore, moving average is used as a smoothing technique to make the dataset more stable and reduce the effects of noise data. A comparative evaluation has been conducted to determine the performances of the above-mentioned methods. In this study, we proposed four different DL models and compared them with existing techniques. For the comparison of the results, we used evaluation criteria such as Nash–Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE), mean square error (MSE) and percent bias (PBIAS). The experimental results indicate that our bidirectional gated recurrent units (BiGRU) model outperforms both ML algorithms and existing solutions with 0.971 NSE, 0.001 MSE and − 1.536 PBIAS scores.
Publisher
Springer International Publishing,Springer Nature B.V
