TY - JOUR
T1 - Multi-step streamflow forecasting using data-driven non-linear methods in contrasting climate regimes
AU - Karran, Daniel J.
AU - Morin, Efrat
AU - Adamowski, Jan
PY - 2014
Y1 - 2014
N2 - Considering the popularity of using data-driven non-linear methods for forecasting streamflow, there has been no exploration of how well such models perform in climate regimes with differing hydrological characteristics, nor has the performance of these models, coupled with wavelet transforms, been compared for lead times of less than 1 month. This study compares the use of four different models, namely artificial neural networks (ANNs), support vector regression (SVR), wavelet-ANN, and wavelet-SVR in a Mediterranean, Oceanic, and Hemiboreal watershed. Model performance was tested for 1, 2 and 3 day forecasting lead times, measured by fractional standard error, the coefficient of determination, Nash-Sutcliffe model efficiency, multiplicative bias, probability of detection and false alarm rate. SVR based models performed best overall, but no one model outperformed the others in more than one watershed, suggesting that some models may be more suitable for certain types of data. Overall model performance varied greatly between climate regimes, suggesting that higher persistence and slower hydrological processes (i.e. snowmelt, glacial runoff, and subsurface flow) support reliable forecasting using daily and multi-day lead times.
AB - Considering the popularity of using data-driven non-linear methods for forecasting streamflow, there has been no exploration of how well such models perform in climate regimes with differing hydrological characteristics, nor has the performance of these models, coupled with wavelet transforms, been compared for lead times of less than 1 month. This study compares the use of four different models, namely artificial neural networks (ANNs), support vector regression (SVR), wavelet-ANN, and wavelet-SVR in a Mediterranean, Oceanic, and Hemiboreal watershed. Model performance was tested for 1, 2 and 3 day forecasting lead times, measured by fractional standard error, the coefficient of determination, Nash-Sutcliffe model efficiency, multiplicative bias, probability of detection and false alarm rate. SVR based models performed best overall, but no one model outperformed the others in more than one watershed, suggesting that some models may be more suitable for certain types of data. Overall model performance varied greatly between climate regimes, suggesting that higher persistence and slower hydrological processes (i.e. snowmelt, glacial runoff, and subsurface flow) support reliable forecasting using daily and multi-day lead times.
KW - Artificial neural networks
KW - Climate regime
KW - Forecasting
KW - Streamflow
KW - Support vector regression
KW - Times series analysis
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84901021366&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.2166/hydro.2013.042
DO - 10.2166/hydro.2013.042
M3 - ???researchoutput.researchoutputtypes.contributiontojournal.article???
AN - SCOPUS:84901021366
SN - 1464-7141
VL - 16
SP - 671
EP - 689
JO - Journal of Hydroinformatics
JF - Journal of Hydroinformatics
IS - 3
ER -