STREAMFLOW AND SOIL MOISTURE FORECASTING WITH HYBRID DATA INTELLIGENT MACHINE LEARNING APPROACHES: CASE STUDIES IN THE AUSTRALIAN MURRAY–DARLING BASIN

Soil moisture forecasting by a hybrid machine learning technique: ELM integrated with ensemble empirical mode decomposition

Very short-term reactive forecasting of the solar ultraviolet index using an extreme learning machine integrated with the solar zenith angle

Stream waters play a crucial role in catering to the world's needs with the required quality of water. Due to the discharges of wastewater from the various point and nonpoint sources, most of the watersheds are contaminated easily. The Upper Green River watershed in Kentucky, USA, is one such watershed that is contaminated over the years due to the runoff from rural areas and agricultural lands and combined sewer overflows (CSOs) from urban areas. Monitoring and characterizing the water quality status of streams in such watersheds has become of great importance, with multivariate statistical techniques such as regression, factor analysis, cluster analysis, and artificial intelligence methods such as artificial neural networks (ANNs). The water quality parameters, namely, fecal coliform (FC), turbidity, pH, and conductivity have been predicted quantitatively using ANNs to understand the water quality status of streams in the Upper Green River watershed elsewhere. In this study, a novel attempt has been made to predict the status of the quality of the Green River water with the predictive capabilities of a few decision tree (DT) algorithms such as classification and regression tree (CART) model, multivariate adaptive regression splines (MARS) model, random forest (RF) model, and extreme learning machine (ELM) model. The RF model's performance is better in predicting FC, turbidity, and pH than CART models in training and testing phases. Relatively, MARS and ELM models did better in testing though the performance is poorer in training. For example, we obtain the RMSE values of 2206, 2532, 1533, and 1969 using RF, CART, MARS, and ELM for FC in testing. A good correlation has been observed between conductivity and temperature, precipitation, and land-use factors for the MARS model. Overall, DT models are helpful in understanding, interpreting the outcomes, and visualizing the results compared with the other models. PRACTITIONER POINTS: The prediction of stream water quality parameters using decision trees is explored. The climate and land use parameters are used as input parameters to the modeling. The DT models of CART, MARS, RF, and ANNs such as ELM are explored to predict stream water quality. The RF model shows stable results compared with CART, MARS, and ELM for the data explored. Apart from the R2 value, RMSE and MAE indicate the effectiveness of DTs in prediction.

Load-carrying capacity and mode failure simulation of beam-column joint connection: Application of self-tuning machine learning model

Artificial intelligence approach for the prediction of Robusta coffee yield using soil fertility properties

Predicting compressive strength of lightweight foamed concrete using extreme learning machine model

An efficient neuro-evolutionary hybrid modelling mechanism for the estimation of daily global solar radiation in the Sunshine State of Australia

Estimation of soil temperature from meteorological data using different machine learning models

Significant wave height forecasting via an extreme learning machine model integrated with improved complete ensemble empirical mode decomposition

Survey of different data-intelligent modeling strategies for forecasting air temperature using geographic information as model predictors

A predictive model for streamflow has practical implications for understanding the drought hydrology, environmental monitoring and agriculture, ecosystems and resource management. In this study, the state-or-art extreme learning machine (ELM) model was utilized to simulate the mean streamflow water level (Q WL) for three hydrological sites in eastern Queensland (Gowrie Creek, Albert, and Mary River). The performance of the ELM model was benchmarked with the artificial neural network (ANN) model. The ELM model was a fast computational method using single-layer feedforward neural networks and randomly determined hidden neurons that learns the historical patterns embedded in the input variables. A set of nine predictors with the month (to consider the seasonality of Q WL); rainfall; Southern Oscillation Index; Pacific Decadal Oscillation Index; ENSO Modoki Index; Indian Ocean Dipole Index; and Nino 3.0, Nino 3.4, and Nino 4.0 sea surface temperatures (SSTs) were utilized. A selection of variables was performed using cross correlation with Q WL, yielding the best inputs defined by (month; P; Nino 3.0 SST; Nino 4.0 SST; Southern Oscillation Index (SOI); ENSO Modoki Index (EMI)) for Gowrie Creek, (month; P; SOI; Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO); Indian Ocean Dipole (IOD); EMI) for Albert River, and by (month; P; Nino 3.4 SST; Nino 4.0 SST; SOI; EMI) for Mary River site. A three-layer neuronal structure trialed with activation equations defined by sigmoid, logarithmic, tangent sigmoid, sine, hardlim, triangular, and radial basis was utilized, resulting in optimum ELM model with hard-limit function and architecture 6-106-1 (Gowrie Creek), 6-74-1 (Albert River), and 6-146-1 (Mary River). The alternative ELM and ANN models with two inputs (month and rainfall) and the ELM model with all nine inputs were also developed. The performance was evaluated using the mean absolute error (MAE), coefficient of determination (r (2)), Willmott's Index (d), peak deviation (P dv), and Nash-Sutcliffe coefficient (E NS). The results verified that the ELM model as more accurate than the ANN model. Inputting the best input variables improved the performance of both models where optimum ELM yielded R(2) ≈ (0.964, 0.957, and 0.997), d ≈ (0.968, 0.982, and 0.986), and MAE ≈ (0.053, 0.023, and 0.079) for Gowrie Creek, Albert River, and Mary River, respectively, and optimum ANN model yielded smaller R(2) and d and larger simulation errors. When all inputs were utilized, simulations were consistently worse with R (2) (0.732, 0.859, and 0.932 (Gowrie Creek), d (0.802, 0.876, and 0.903 (Albert River), and MAE (0.144, 0.049, and 0.222 (Mary River) although they were relatively better than using the month and rainfall as inputs. Also, with the best input combinations, the frequency of simulation errors fell in the smallest error bracket. Therefore, it can be ascertained that the ELM model offered an efficient approach for the streamflow simulation and, therefore, can be explored for its practicality in hydrological modeling.

A predictive model for streamflow has practical implications for understanding the drought hydrology, environmental monitoring and agriculture, ecosystems and resource management. In this study, the state-or-art extreme learning machine (ELM) model was utilized to simulate the mean streamflow water level (Q WL) for three hydrological sites in eastern Queensland (Gowrie Creek, Albert, and Mary River). The performance of the ELM model was benchmarked with the artificial neural network (ANN) model. The ELM model was a fast computational method using single-layer feedforward neural networks and randomly determined hidden neurons that learns the historical patterns embedded in the input variables. A set of nine predictors with the month (to consider the seasonality of Q WL); rainfall; Southern Oscillation Index; Pacific Decadal Oscillation Index; ENSO Modoki Index; Indian Ocean Dipole Index; and Nino 3.0, Nino 3.4, and Nino 4.0 sea surface temperatures (SSTs) were utilized. A selection of variables was performed using cross correlation with Q WL, yielding the best inputs defined by (month; P; Nino 3.0 SST; Nino 4.0 SST; Southern Oscillation Index (SOI); ENSO Modoki Index (EMI)) for Gowrie Creek, (month; P; SOI; Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO); Indian Ocean Dipole (IOD); EMI) for Albert River, and by (month; P; Nino 3.4 SST; Nino 4.0 SST; SOI; EMI) for Mary River site. A three-layer neuronal structure trialed with activation equations defined by sigmoid, logarithmic, tangent sigmoid, sine, hardlim, triangular, and radial basis was utilized, resulting in optimum ELM model with hard-limit function and architecture 6-106-1 (Gowrie Creek), 6-74-1 (Albert River), and 6-146-1 (Mary River). The alternative ELM and ANN models with two inputs (month and rainfall) and the ELM model with all nine inputs were also developed. The performance was evaluated using the mean absolute error (MAE), coefficient of determination (r (2)), Willmott's Index (d), peak deviation (P dv), and Nash-Sutcliffe coefficient (E NS). The results verified that the ELM model as more accurate than the ANN model. Inputting the best input variables improved the performance of both models where optimum ELM yielded R(2) ≈ (0.964, 0.957, and 0.997), d ≈ (0.968, 0.982, and 0.986), and MAE ≈ (0.053, 0.023, and 0.079) for Gowrie Creek, Albert River, and Mary River, respectively, and optimum ANN model yielded smaller R(2) and d and larger simulation errors. When all inputs were utilized, simulations were consistently worse with R (2) (0.732, 0.859, and 0.932 (Gowrie Creek), d (0.802, 0.876, and 0.903 (Albert River), and MAE (0.144, 0.049, and 0.222 (Mary River) although they were relatively better than using the month and rainfall as inputs. Also, with the best input combinations, the frequency of simulation errors fell in the smallest error bracket. Therefore, it can be ascertained that the ELM model offered an efficient approach for the streamflow simulation and, therefore, can be explored for its practicality in hydrological modeling.

An enhanced monthly runoff time series prediction using extreme learning machine optimized by salp swarm algorithm based on time varying filtering based empirical mode decomposition

In this paper, several extreme learning machine (ELM) models, including standard extreme learning machine with sigmoid activation function (S-ELM), extreme learning machine with radial basis activation function (R-ELM), online sequential extreme learning machine (OS-ELM), and optimally pruned extreme learning machine (OP-ELM), are newly applied for predicting dissolved oxygen concentration with and without water quality variables as predictors. Firstly, using data from eight United States Geological Survey (USGS) stations located in different rivers basins, USA, the S-ELM, R-ELM, OS-ELM, and OP-ELM were compared against the measured dissolved oxygen (DO) using four water quality variables, water temperature, specific conductance, turbidity, and pH, as predictors. For each station, we used data measured at an hourly time step for a period of 4years. The dataset was divided into a training set (70%) and a validation set (30%). We selected several combinations of the water quality variables as inputs for each ELM model and six different scenarios were compared. Secondly, an attempt was made to predict DO concentration without water quality variables. To achieve this goal, we used the year numbers, 2008, 2009, etc., month numbers from (1) to (12), day numbers from (1) to (31) and hour numbers from (00:00) to (24:00) as predictors. Thirdly, the best ELM models were trained using validation dataset and tested with the training dataset. The performances of the four ELM models were evaluated using four statistical indices: the coefficient of correlation (R), the Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE), the root mean squared error (RMSE), and the mean absolute error (MAE). Results obtained from the eight stations indicated that: (i) the best results were obtained by the S-ELM, R-ELM, OS-ELM, and OP-ELM models having four water quality variables as predictors; (ii) out of eight stations, the OP-ELM performed better than the other three ELM models at seven stations while the R-ELM performed the best at one station. The OS-ELM models performed the worst and provided the lowest accuracy; (iii) for predicting DO without water quality variables, the R-ELM performed the best at seven stations followed by the S-ELM in the second place and the OP-ELM performed the worst with low accuracy; (iv) for the final application where training ELM models with validation dataset and testing with training dataset, the OP-ELM provided the best accuracy using water quality variables and the R-ELM performed the best at all eight stations without water quality variables. Fourthly, and finally, we compared the results obtained from different ELM models with those obtained using multiple linear regression (MLR) and multilayer perceptron neural network (MLPNN). Results obtained using MLPNN and MLR models reveal that: (i) using water quality variables as predictors, the MLR performed the worst and provided the lowest accuracy in all stations; (ii) MLPNN was ranked in the second place at two stations, in the third place at four stations, and finally, in the fourth place at two stations, (iii) for predicting DO without water quality variables, MLPNN is ranked in the second place at five stations, and ranked in the third, fourth, and fifth places in the remaining three stations, while MLR was ranked in the last place with very low accuracy at all stations. Overall, the results suggest that the ELM is more effective than the MLPNN and MLR for modelling DO concentration in river ecosystems.

Comparison of artificial intelligence and empirical models for estimation of daily diffuse solar radiation in North China Plain