The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Developing reservoir monthly inflow forecasts using artificial intelligence and climate phenomenon information
Open accessAbstract
Reservoirs are fundamental human‐built infrastructures that collect, store, and deliver fresh surface water in a timely manner for many purposes. Efficient reservoir operation requires policy makers and operators to understand how reservoir inflows are changing under different hydrological and climatic conditions to enable forecast‐informed operations. Over the last decade, the uses of Artificial Intelligence and Data Mining [AI & DM] techniques in assisting reservoir streamflow subseasonal to seasonal forecasts have been increasing. In this study, Random Forest [RF), Artificial Neural Network (ANN), and Support Vector Regression (SVR) are employed and compared with respect to their capabilities for predicting 1 month‐ahead reservoir inflows for two headwater reservoirs in USA and China. Both current and lagged hydrological information and 17 known climate phenomenon indices, i.e., PDO and ENSO, etc., are selected as predictors for simulating reservoir inflows. Results show (1) three methods are capable of providing monthly reservoir inflows with satisfactory statistics; (2) the results obtained by Random Forest have the best statistical performances compared with the other two methods; (3) another advantage of Random Forest algorithm is its capability of interpreting raw model inputs; (4) climate phenomenon indices are useful in assisting monthly or seasonal forecasts of reservoir inflow; and (5) different climate conditions are autocorrelated with up to several months, and the climatic information and their lags are cross correlated with local hydrological conditions in our case studies.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Quinlan, J. R. (1986) · Machine Learning · doi:10.1007/bf00116251 · Cited by 21,439
Breiman, L. (1996) · Machine Learning · doi:10.1007/bf00058655 · Cited by 16,325
Model Evaluation Guidelines for Systematic Quantification of Accuracy in Watershed Simulations
Moriasi, D. N., Arnold, J. G., Liew, M. W. V., Bingner, R. L., Harmel, R. D., & Veith, T. L. (2007) · Transactions of the ASABE · doi:10.13031/2013.23153 · Cited by 13,446
Advancing monthly streamflow prediction accuracy of CART models using ensemble learning paradigms
Erdal, H. I., & Karakurt, O. (2013) · Journal of Hydrology · doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2012.11.015 · Cited by 191
Cited by
The Role of AI in Hospitals and Clinics: Transforming Healthcare in the 21st Century
Maleki Varnosfaderani, S., & Forouzanfar, M. (2024) · Bioengineering · doi:10.3390/bioengineering11040337 · Cited by 931
Tyralis, H., Papacharalampous, G., & Langousis, A. (2019) · Water · doi:10.3390/w11050910 · Cited by 771
Ibrahim, K. S. M. H., Huang, Y. F., Ahmed, A. N., Koo, C. H., & El-Shafie, A. (2022) · Alexandria Engineering Journal · doi:10.1016/j.aej.2021.04.100 · Cited by 258
Metadata
- Authors
- Yang, T., Asanjan, A. A., Welles, E., Gao, X., Sorooshian, S., & Liu, X.
- Venue
- Water Resources Research
- Publisher
- American Geophysical Union (AGU)
- Published
- 2017-04
- Volume
- 53
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 2786-2812
- ISSN
- 0043-1397 (ISSN-L)
- 1944-7973
- OpenAlex
- W2593080009
- Cited by
- 303
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 16.72
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Developing reservoir monthly inflow forecasts using artificial intelligence and climate phenomenon information. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/2017wr020482
- The paper
- Yang, T., Asanjan, A. A., Welles, E., Gao, X., Sorooshian, S., & Liu, X. (2017). Developing reservoir monthly inflow forecasts using artificial intelligence and climate phenomenon information. Water Resources Research. https://doi.org/10.1002/2017wr020482
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.