Abstract

Neural networks have been shown to be extremely effective rainfall-runoff models, where the river discharge is predicted from meteorological inputs. However, the question remains, what have these models learned? Is it possible to extract information about the learned relationships that map inputs to outputs? And do these mappings represent known hydrological concepts? Small-scale experiments have demonstrated that the internal states of Long Short-Term Memory Networks (LSTMs), a particular neural network architecture predisposed to hydrological modelling, can be interpreted. By extracting the tensors which represent the learned translation from inputs (precipitation, temperature) to outputs (discharge), this research seeks to understand what information the LSTM captures about the hydrological system. We assess the hypothesis that the LSTM replicates real-world processes and that we can extract information about these processes from the internal states of the LSTM. We examine the cell-state vector, which represents the memory of the LSTM, and explore the ways in which the LSTM learns to reproduce stores of water, such as soil moisture and snow cover. We use a simple regression approach to map the LSTM state-vector to our target stores (soil moisture and snow). Good correlations (R2 > 0.8) between the probe outputs and the target variables of interest provide evidence that the LSTM contains information that reflects known hydrological processes comparable with the concept of variable-capacity soil moisture stores. The implications of this study are threefold: 1) LSTMs reproduce known hydrological processes. 2) While conceptual models have theoretical assumptions embedded in the model a priori, the LSTM derives these from the data. These learned representations are interpretable by scientists. 3) LSTMs can be used to gain an estimate of intermediate stores of water such as soil moisture. While machine learning interpretability is still a nascent field, and our approach reflects a simple technique for exploring what the model has learned, the results are robust to different initial conditions and to a variety of benchmarking experiments. We therefore argue that deep learning approaches can be used to advance our scientific goals as well as our predictive goals.

Highlights

  • Long Short-Term Memory Networks (LSTMs) have demonstrated state-of-the-art performance for rainfall-runoff modelling for a variety of locations and tasks (Kratzert et al, 2018, 2019c; Ma et al, 2020; Lees et al, 2021; Frame et al, 2021)

  • The question remains, what have these models learned? Is it possible to extract information about the learned relationships that map inputs to outputs? And do these mappings represent known hydrological concepts? Small-scale experiments have demonstrated that the internal states of Long Short-Term Memory Networks (LSTMs), 5 a particular neural network architecture predisposed to hydrological modelling, can be interpreted

  • 30 What have these models learned about the hydrological system that allows them to make highly accurate predictions? Can we interrogate the model to determine whether the LSTM has learned a physically realistic mapping from inputs to outputs? Being able to reason about the model and its behavior is a key component of dependable models

Read more

Summary

Introduction

LSTMs have demonstrated state-of-the-art performance for rainfall-runoff modelling for a variety of locations and tasks (Kratzert et al, 2018, 2019c; Ma et al, 2020; Lees et al, 2021; Frame et al, 2021). Peter 35 Young’s work on Data-Based Mechanistic modelling (DBM) emphasised the need to apply flexible data-driven models before applying a mechanistic interpretation to the learned representation of these models (Young and Beven, 1994; Young, 2003, 1998). In an early application of neural networks to rainfall-runoff modelling, Wilby et al (2003) sought to challenge preconceptions of neural network approaches as uninterpretable They found that nodes in their Multi Layer Perceptron corresponded to quickflow, baseflow and soil saturation, and showed how the learned representation of deep learning models could be interpreted. They sought to determine whether neural networks were capable of reproducing both the outputs and internal functioning of conceptual hydrological models

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call