Multistep ahead streamflow forecasting: Role of calibration data in conceptual and neural network modeling

Water Resources Research

Volumn 43, Issue 11, 2007, Pages

  Toth, Elena ^a   Brath, Armando ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BOLOGNA   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CALIBRATION; FORECASTING; NEURAL NETWORKS; REAL TIME SYSTEMS; RIVER BASIN PROJECTS;

HYDRO-METEOROLOGICAL DATA; RAINFALL-RUNOFF MODELING; RIVER FLOW FORECASTING SYSTEM;

STREAM FLOW;

CALIBRATION; FORECASTING; NEURAL NETWORKS; REAL TIME SYSTEMS; RIVER BASIN PROJECTS; STREAM FLOW;

CALIBRATION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; FLOOD FORECASTING; FORECASTING METHOD; HYDROLOGICAL MODELING; RAINFALL-RUNOFF MODELING; STREAMFLOW;

EID: 37549066943     PISSN: 00431397     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1029/2006WR005383     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Abrahart, R. J., and L. See (2000), Comparing neural network and autoregressive moving average techniques for the provision of continuous river flow forecasts in two contrasting catchments, Hydrol. Processes, 14(11), 2157-2172.
2. Abrahart, R. J., L. See, and P. E. Kneale (2001), Investigating the role of saliency analysis with a neural network rainfall-runoff model, Comput. Geosci., 27, 921-928.
3. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) Task Committee on Application of the Artificial Neural Networks in Hydrology (2000), Artificial neural networks in hydrology II: Hydrologic applications, J. Hydrol. Eng., 5, 124-137.
4. Anetil, F., C. Perrin, and V. Andreassian (2004), Impact of the length of observed records on the performance of ANN and of conceptual parsimonious rainfall-runoff forecasting models, Environ. Model. Software, 19, 357-368.
5. Birikundavyi, S., R. Labib, H. T. Trung, and J. Rousselle (2002), Performance of neural networks in daily streamflow forecasting, J. Hydrol. Eng., 7(5), 392-398.
6. Brath, A., A. Montanari, and E. Toth (2002), On the use of neural networks and non-parametric methods for improving real-time flood forecasting obtained through conceptual hydrologic models, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 6(4), 627-640.
7. Brath, A., A. Montanari, and E. Toth (2004), Analysis of the effects of different scenarios of historical data availability on the calibration of a spatially-distributed hydrological model, J. Hydrol., 291, 232-253.
8. Cameron, D., P. Kneale, and L. See (2002), An evaluation of a traditional and a neural net modelling approach to flood forecasting for an upland catchment, Hydrol. Processes, 16, 1033-1046.
9. Campolo, M., P. Andreussi, and A. Soldati (1999), River flood forecasting with neural network model, Water Resour. Res., 35(4), 1191-1197.
10. Coulibaly, P., F. Anctil, and B. Bobèe (2000), Daily reservoir inflow forecasting using artificial neural networks with stopped training approach, J. Hydrol., 230, 244-257.
11. Dawson, C. W., and R. Wilby (1998), An artificial neural network approach to rainfall-runoff modeling, Hydrol. Sci. J., 43(1), 47-65.
12. Dawson, C. W., and R. Wilby (2001), Hydrological modelling using artificial neural networks, Prog. Phys. Geogr, 25(1), 80-108.
13. Dibike, Y. B., and D. P. Solomatine (2001), River flow forecasting using artificial neural networks, Phys. Chem. Earth B, 26(1), 1-7.
14. Doorenbos, J., W. O. Pruitt, A. Aboukhaled, J. Damagnez, N. G. Dastane, C. van der Berg, P. E. Rijtema, O. M. Ashford, and M. Frere (1984), Guidelines for predicting crop water requirements, FAO Irrig. Drainage Pap.
15. Duan, Q., S. Sorooshian, and H. V. Gupta (1992), Effective and efficient global optimization for conceptual rainfall-runoff models, Water Resour. Res., 28, 1015-1031.
16. Franchini, M. (1996), Use of a genetic algorithm combined with a local search method for the automatic calibration of conceptual rainfall runoff models, Hydrol. Sci. J., 41, 21-39.
17. Gan, T. Y., and G. F. Biftu (1996), Automatic calibration of conceptual rainfall-runoff models: Optimization algorithms, catchment conditions, and model structure, Water Resour. Res., 32(12), 3513-3524.
18. Gaume, E., and R. Gosset (2003), Overparametrization a major obstacle to the use of neural networks in hydrology, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 7(5), 693-706.
19. Hagan, M. T., and M. Menhaj (1994), Training feedforward networks with the Marquardt algorithm, IEEE Trans. Neural Networ., 5(6), 989-993.
20. Hornik, K., M. Stinchcombe, and H. White (1989), Multilayer feedforward networks are universal approximators, Neural Networks, 2, 359-366.
21. Hsu, K., H. V. Gupta, and S. Sorooshian (1995), Artificial Neural network modeling of the rainfall-runoff process, Water Resour. Res., 31(10), 2517-2530.
22. Hsu, K., H. V. Gupta, X. Gao, S. Sorooshian, and B. Imam (2002), Self-organizing linear output map (SOLO): An artificial neural network suitable for hydrologic modeling and analysis, Water Resour. Res., 38(12), 1302, doi:10.1029/2001WR000795.
23. Jain, A., and S. K. V. P. Indurthy (2003), Comparative analysis of event based rainfall-runoff modeling techniques-deterministic, statistical, and artificial neural networks, J. Hydrol. Eng., 8(2), 1-6.
24. Kachroo, R. K. (1992), River flow forecasting. Part 5. Applications of a conceptual model, J. Hydrol., 133, 141-178.
25. Laio, F., A. Porporato, R. Revelli, and L. Ridolfi (2003), A comparison of nonlinear flood forecasting methods, Water Resour. Res., 39(5), 1129, doi: 10.1029/2002WR001551.
26. Legates, D. R., and G. J. McCabe (1999), Evaluating the use of 'goodness-of-fit' measures in hydrologic and hydroclimatic model validation, Water Resour. Res., 35, 233-241.
27. Lischeid, G., and S. Uhlenbrook (2003), Checking a process-based catchment model by artificial neural networks, Hydrol. Processes, 17, 265-277.
28. Maier, H., and G. Dandy (2000), Neural networks for the prediction and forecasting of water resources variables: A review of modeling issues and applications, Environ. Model. Software, 15(1), 101-104.
29. Maier, H. R., and G. C. Dandy (1996), The use of artificial neural networks for the prediction of water quality parameters, Water Resour. Res., 32(4), 1013-1022.
30. Minns, A. W., and M. J. Hall (1996), Artificial neural networks as rainfall runoff models, Hydrol. Sci., 41, 399-417.
31. Nash, J. E., and J. V. Sutcliffe (1970), River flow forecasting through conceptual models, 1. A discussion of principles, J. Hydrol., 10, 282-290.
32. Schreider, S., S. Yu, A. J. Jakeman, B. G. Dyer, and R. I. Francis (1997), A combined deterministic and self-adaptive stochastic algorithm for streamflow forecasting with application to catchments of the Upper Murray Basin, Australia, Environ. Model. Software, 12(1), 93-104.
33. Solomatine, D. P., and K. N. Dulal (2003), Model trees as an alternative to neural networks in rainfall-runoff modelling, Hydrol. Sci. J., 48(3) 399-411.
34. Tingsanchali, T., and M. R. Gautam (2000), Application of Tank, NAM, ARMA and neural network models to flood forecasting, Hydrol. Processes, 14, 2473-2487.
35. Todini, E. (1996), The ARNO rainfall runoff model, J. Hydrol., 175, 339-382.
36. Tokar, A. S., and M. Markus (2000), Precipitation runoff modeling using artificial neural network and conceptual models, J. Hydrol. Eng., 5(2), 156-161.
37. Toth, E., and A. Brath (2004), Use of spatially-distributed or lumped precipitation inputs in conceptual and black-box models for runoff forecasting, in Recent Advances in Peak River Flow Modelling, Prediction and Real-Time Forecasting: Assessment of the Impacts of Land-Use and Climate Changes, edited by A. Brath, A. Montanari, and E. Toth, pp. 247-261, BIOS, Cosenza, Italy.
38. Toth, E., A. Brath, and A. Montanari (2000), Comparison of short-term rainfall prediction models for real-time flood forecasting, J. Hydrol., 239, 132-147.
39. World Meteorological Organization (WMO) (1992), Simulated real-time intercomparison of hydrological models, WMO Publ. 779, 241 pp., Geneva.
40. Zealand, C. M., D. H. Burn, and S. P. Simonovic (1999), Short term stream-flow forecasting using artificial neural networks, J. Hydrol., 214, 32-48.
41. Zhao, R. J., Y. L. Zhuang, L. R. Fang, X. R. Liu, and Q. S. Zhang (1980), The Xinanjiang model, IAHS Publ., 129, 351-356.