Abstract
With recent developments in computational techniques, Data-driven Machine Learning Models (DMLs) have shown great potential in simulating streamflow and capturing the rainfall-runoff relationship in given watersheds, which are traditionally fulfilled by Process-based Hydrologic Models (PHMs). There are debates on whether the DMLs can outperform and possibly replace the classical PHMs for streamflow simulation and river forecasting, but no clear conclusions have been made. This study aims to investigate whether the newer DMLs have any potential in further improving the simulation accuracy of classical PHMs, and vice versa. To do this, we compared a few popular PHMs and DMLs over four watersheds across the Continental US (CONUS) that are associated with different input, climate, and regional conditions. A total of five hydrologic models were chosen, including (1) two classical lumped models, i.e., the Sacramento Soil Moisture Accounting (SAC-SMA) and Xinanjiang (XAJ); (2) one modern distributed model, termed Coupled Routing and Excess Storage (CREST); (3) and two DMLs including an Artificial Neural Networks (ANN) and a deep learning model, termed Long Short Term Memory (LSTM). Our results demonstrated that the DMLs still significantly biased when using the baseline input scenario with the PHMs. However, the DMLs fed with delayed input scenarios had great potential and can reach high simulation accuracy. The DMLs, especially the ANN, outperformed other employed models under the rainfall-runoff relationship in which rainfall dominantly drives. The DMLs also showed better performance in the high-flow regime, while the PHMs had a better performance for the low-flow regime, implying both PHMs and DMLs have their own merits and are worthy of joint development. In general, our study indicated a great potential of using DMLs to simulate streamflow, but further studies are still needed to verify the transferability and scalability of DMLs in large-scale experiments, such as the Distributed Model Intercomparison Projects 1&2 conducted by National Weather Services but to compare modern DMLs and PHMs.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.