Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 312

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 51 of the 51 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Long lead-time daily and monthly streamflow forecasting using machine learning methods

Cheng, M., Fang, F., Kinouchi, T., Navon, I.M., Pain, C.C.·2020·Journal of Hydrology

Abstract

Abstract Long lead-time streamflow forecasting is of great significance for water resources planning and management in both the short and long terms. Despite of some studies using machine learning methods in streamflow forecasting, only few studies have been conducted to explore long lead-time forecasting capabilities of these methods, and gain an insight into systematic comparison of model forecasting performance in both the short and long terms. In this work, an artificial neural network (ANN) and a long short term memory (LSTM), a powerful tool for learning long-term temporal dependencies and capturing nonlinear relationship, have been adopted to forecast streamflow at daily and monthly scales for a long lead-time period. For long lead-time streamflow forecasting, a recursive forecasting procedure, which takes the last one-step-ahead forecast as a new input for the next-step-ahead forecast, is used in the ANN and LSTM forecasting systems. Two models are trained and validated for streamflow forecasting using the rainfall and runoff datasets collected from the Nan River Basin and Ping River Basin, Thailand, covering the period 1974 to 2014. To further explore the impact of parameter settings on model performance, two parameters, i.e. the length of time lag and the number of maximum epochs, are examined in the ANN and LSTM models. The main findings are highlighted here. First, with an optimal setting up of model parameters, both the ANN and LSTM model can provide accurate daily forecasting (up to 20 days ahead). Second, in comparison to the ANN model, the LSTM model exhibits better model performance in long lead-time daily forecasting, but less satisfactory in multi-monthly forecasting due to lack of large monthly training dataset. Third, the selection of the length of the time lag and number of maximum epochs used in both ANN and LSTM modelling are the key for long lead-time streamflow forecasting at daily and monthly scales. These findings suggest that the LSTM could be advance in daily streamflow forecasting and thus would be helpful to assist in strategy decisions in water resource management.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2020.125376

Cites

51 of 51 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 51 references

Cited by

See all 312

Metadata

Authors
Cheng, M., Fang, F., Kinouchi, T., Navon, I. M., & Pain, C. C.
Venue
Journal of Hydrology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-11
Volume
590
Pages
125376
ISSN
0022-1694 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3047298021
Cited by
312
References
51
FWCI
11.55
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: Long lead-time daily and monthly streamflow forecasting using machine learning methods. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2020.125376
The paper
Cheng, M., Fang, F., Kinouchi, T., Navon, I. M., & Pain, C. C. (2020). Long lead-time daily and monthly streamflow forecasting using machine learning methods. Journal of Hydrology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2020.125376

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.