Real-time streamflow forecasting: AI vs. Hydrologic insights

In this paper, we propose a set of simple benchmarks for the evaluation of data-based models for real-time streamflow forecasting, such as those developed with sophisticated Artificial Intelligence (AI) algorithms. The benchmarks are also data-based and provide context to judge incremental improveme...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Witold F. Krajewski, Ganesh R. Ghimire, Ibrahim Demir, Ricardo Mantilla
Formato: article
Lenguaje:EN
Publicado: Elsevier 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://doaj.org/article/4c2cfbdae0dd4b09a187c30eb60680c1
Etiquetas: Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
id oai:doaj.org-article:4c2cfbdae0dd4b09a187c30eb60680c1
record_format dspace
spelling oai:doaj.org-article:4c2cfbdae0dd4b09a187c30eb60680c12021-11-30T04:17:31ZReal-time streamflow forecasting: AI vs. Hydrologic insights2589-915510.1016/j.hydroa.2021.100110https://doaj.org/article/4c2cfbdae0dd4b09a187c30eb60680c12021-12-01T00:00:00Zhttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589915521000389https://doaj.org/toc/2589-9155In this paper, we propose a set of simple benchmarks for the evaluation of data-based models for real-time streamflow forecasting, such as those developed with sophisticated Artificial Intelligence (AI) algorithms. The benchmarks are also data-based and provide context to judge incremental improvements in the performance metrics from the more complicated approaches. The benchmarks include temporal and spatial persistence, persistence corrected for baseflow and streamflow, as well as river distance weighted runoff obtained from space-time distributed rainfall. In the development of the benchmarks, we use basic hydrologic insights such as flow aggregation by the river network, scale-dependence in basin response, streamflow partitioning into quick flow and baseflow, water travel time, and rainfall averaging by the basin width function. The study uses 140 streamflow gauges in Iowa that cover a range of basin scales between 7 and 37,000 km2. The data cover 17 years. This work demonstrates that the proposed benchmarks can provide good performance according to several commonly used metrics. For example, streamflow forecasting at half of the test locations across years achieves a Kling-Gupta Efficiency (KGE) score of 0.6 or higher at one-day ahead lead time, and 20% of cases reach the KGE of 0.8 or higher. The proposed benchmarks are easy to implement and should prove useful for developers of data-based as well as physics-based hydrologic models and real-time data assimilation techniques.Witold F. KrajewskiGanesh R. GhimireIbrahim DemirRicardo MantillaElsevierarticleReal-time streamflow forecastingArtificial intelligenceHydrologic insightsBenchmarkingPersistenceIowaEnvironmental engineeringTA170-171Environmental sciencesGE1-350ENJournal of Hydrology X, Vol 13, Iss , Pp 100110- (2021)
institution DOAJ
collection DOAJ
language EN
topic Real-time streamflow forecasting
Artificial intelligence
Hydrologic insights
Benchmarking
Persistence
Iowa
Environmental engineering
TA170-171
Environmental sciences
GE1-350
spellingShingle Real-time streamflow forecasting
Artificial intelligence
Hydrologic insights
Benchmarking
Persistence
Iowa
Environmental engineering
TA170-171
Environmental sciences
GE1-350
Witold F. Krajewski
Ganesh R. Ghimire
Ibrahim Demir
Ricardo Mantilla
Real-time streamflow forecasting: AI vs. Hydrologic insights
description In this paper, we propose a set of simple benchmarks for the evaluation of data-based models for real-time streamflow forecasting, such as those developed with sophisticated Artificial Intelligence (AI) algorithms. The benchmarks are also data-based and provide context to judge incremental improvements in the performance metrics from the more complicated approaches. The benchmarks include temporal and spatial persistence, persistence corrected for baseflow and streamflow, as well as river distance weighted runoff obtained from space-time distributed rainfall. In the development of the benchmarks, we use basic hydrologic insights such as flow aggregation by the river network, scale-dependence in basin response, streamflow partitioning into quick flow and baseflow, water travel time, and rainfall averaging by the basin width function. The study uses 140 streamflow gauges in Iowa that cover a range of basin scales between 7 and 37,000 km2. The data cover 17 years. This work demonstrates that the proposed benchmarks can provide good performance according to several commonly used metrics. For example, streamflow forecasting at half of the test locations across years achieves a Kling-Gupta Efficiency (KGE) score of 0.6 or higher at one-day ahead lead time, and 20% of cases reach the KGE of 0.8 or higher. The proposed benchmarks are easy to implement and should prove useful for developers of data-based as well as physics-based hydrologic models and real-time data assimilation techniques.
format article
author Witold F. Krajewski
Ganesh R. Ghimire
Ibrahim Demir
Ricardo Mantilla
author_facet Witold F. Krajewski
Ganesh R. Ghimire
Ibrahim Demir
Ricardo Mantilla
author_sort Witold F. Krajewski
title Real-time streamflow forecasting: AI vs. Hydrologic insights
title_short Real-time streamflow forecasting: AI vs. Hydrologic insights
title_full Real-time streamflow forecasting: AI vs. Hydrologic insights
title_fullStr Real-time streamflow forecasting: AI vs. Hydrologic insights
title_full_unstemmed Real-time streamflow forecasting: AI vs. Hydrologic insights
title_sort real-time streamflow forecasting: ai vs. hydrologic insights
publisher Elsevier
publishDate 2021
url https://doaj.org/article/4c2cfbdae0dd4b09a187c30eb60680c1
work_keys_str_mv AT witoldfkrajewski realtimestreamflowforecastingaivshydrologicinsights
AT ganeshrghimire realtimestreamflowforecastingaivshydrologicinsights
AT ibrahimdemir realtimestreamflowforecastingaivshydrologicinsights
AT ricardomantilla realtimestreamflowforecastingaivshydrologicinsights
_version_ 1718406741757001728