The DOI matches its Crossref record; 28 of the 28 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Evaluation of CatBoost method for prediction of reference evapotranspiration in humid regions
Abstract
Abstract Accurate estimation of reference evapotranspiration (ET0) is critical for water resource management and irrigation scheduling. This study evaluated the potential of a new machine learning algorithm using gradient boosting on decision trees with categorical features support (i.e., CatBoost) for accurately estimating daily ET0 with limited meteorological data in humid regions of China. Two other commonly used machine learning algorithms, Random Forests (RF) and Support Vector Machine (SVM), were also assessed for comparison. Eight input combinations of daily meteorological data [including both complete and incomplete combinations of solar radiation (Rs), maximum and minimum temperatures (Tmax and Tmin), relative humidity (Hr) and wind speed (U)] from five weather stations during 2001–2015 in South China were applied for model training and testing. The results showed that all the three algorithms could achieve satisfactory accuracy for ET0 estimation in subtropical China using Rs, Tmax and Tmin, or U, Hr, Tmax and Tmin as inputs, under the circumstances of lacking complete meteorological parameters. The increases in testing RMSE and MAPE over training RMSE and MAPE showed positive correlations with the number of input parameters to the machine learning models. For the local models, among the three algorithms, SVM offered the best prediction accuracy and stability with incomplete combinations of meteorological parameters as inputs, while CatBoost performed best with the complete combination of parameters. Patterns of the generalized models were almost the same as the local models, but the former ones showed less than 10% decreases in RMSE or MAPE in comparison with the latter ones. In addition, the computing time and memory usage for data processing of CatBoost were much less than those of RF and SVM. Overall, as a tree-based algorithm, CatBoost made significant improvements in accuracy, stability and computational cost when compared to RF. Therefore, the CatBoost algorithm has a very high potential for ET0 estimation in humid regions of China, and even possibly in other parts of the world with similar humid climates.
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
Breiman, L. (2001) · Machine Learning · doi:10.1023/a:1010933404324 · Cited by 133,538
Cortes, C., & Vapnik, V. (1995) · Machine Learning · doi:10.1007/bf00994018 · Cited by 59,421
Crop evapotranspiration : guidelines for computing crop water requirements
Allen, R. G., Pereira, L. S., Raes, D., & Smith, M. (1998) · FAO eBooks · Cited by 20,520
A Tutorial on Support Vector Machines for Pattern Recognition
Burges, C. J. C. (1998) · Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery · doi:10.1023/a:1009715923555 · Cited by 16,429
Advances in neural information processing systems 7
(1996) · Computers & Mathematics with Applications · doi:10.1016/s0898-1221(96)90463-0 · Cited by 14,281
CatBoost: gradient boosting with categorical features support
Dorogush, A. V., Ershov, V., & Gulin, A. (2018) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1810.11363 · Cited by 1,319
Understanding Random Forests: From Theory to Practice
Louppe, G. (2014) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1407.7502 · Cited by 693
Fan, J., Wang, X., Wu, L., Zhou, H., Zhang, F., Yu, X., Lu, X., & Xiang, Y. (2018) · Energy Conversion and Management · doi:10.1016/j.enconman.2018.02.087 · Cited by 641
Self-citationUnderstanding Random Forests: From Theory to Practice
Louppe, G. (2014) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.13140/2.1.1570.5928 · Cited by 563
Fan, J., Yue, W., Wu, L., Zhang, F., Cai, H., Wang, X., Lu, X., & Xiang, Y. (2018) · Agricultural and Forest Meteorology · doi:10.1016/j.agrformet.2018.08.019 · Cited by 548
Self-citation
Cited by
Akasheh, M. A., Malik, E. F., Hujran, O., & Zaki, N. (2024) · Expert Systems with Applications · doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2023.121794 · Cited by 78
Bałdyga, M., Barański, K., Belter, J., Kalinowski, M., & Weichbroth, P. (2024) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s24082633 · Cited by 40
Zhou, Z., Lin, A., Wang, L., Qin, W., Zhao, L., Sun, S., Zhong, Y., He, L., & Chen, F. (2021) · Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.147214 · Cited by 19
Zhang, E., Ding, N., Yang, L., Wang, Y., Shi, J., & Xu, Y. (2025) · Natural Hazards · doi:10.1007/s11069-024-07073-3 · Cited by 2
Metadata
- Authors
- Huang, G., Wu, L., Ma, X., Zhang, W., Fan, J., Yu, X., Zeng, W., & Zhou, H.
- Venue
- Journal of Hydrology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2019-07
- Volume
- 574
- Pages
- 1029-1041
- ISSN
- 0022-1694 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2942851257
- Cited by
- 560
- References
- 28
- FWCI
- 19.07
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Evaluation of CatBoost method for prediction of reference evapotranspiration in humid regions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2019.04.085
- The paper
- Huang, G., Wu, L., Ma, X., Zhang, W., Fan, J., Yu, X., Zeng, W., & Zhou, H. (2019). Evaluation of CatBoost method for prediction of reference evapotranspiration in humid regions. Journal of Hydrology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2019.04.085
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.