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
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.
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
Hochreiter, S., & Schmidhuber, J. (1997) · Neural Computation · doi:10.1162/neco.1997.9.8.1735 · Cited by 102,318
River flow forecasting through conceptual models part I — A discussion of principles
Nash, J. E., & Sutcliffe, J. V. (1970) · Journal of Hydrology · doi:10.1016/0022-1694(70)90255-6 · Cited by 23,674
Backpropagation through time: what it does and how to do it
Werbos, P. J. (1990) · Proceedings of the IEEE · doi:10.1109/5.58337 · Cited by 4,879
Evaluating the use of “goodness‐of‐fit” Measures in hydrologic and hydroclimatic model validation
Legates, D. R., & McCabe, G. J. (1999) · Water Resources Research · doi:10.1029/1998wr900018 · Cited by 4,591
Artificial neural networks: fundamentals, computing, design, and application
Basheer, I. A., & Hajmeer, M. (2000) · Journal of Microbiological Methods · doi:10.1016/s0167-7012(00)00201-3 · Cited by 3,231
Interpretation of the correlation coefficient: A basic review
Taylor, R. (1990) · Journal of Diagnostic Medical Sonography · doi:10.1177/875647939000600106 · Cited by 2,390
Global pattern of trends in streamflow and water availability in a changing climate
Milly, P. C. D., Dunne, K. A., & Vecchia, A. V. (2005) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature04312 · Cited by 2,283
Rainfall–runoff modelling using Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) networks
(2018) · doi:10.5194/hess-22-6005-2018 · Cited by 2,114
Ensemble flood forecasting: A review
Cloke, H. L., & Pappenberger, F. (2009) · Journal of Hydrology · doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2009.06.005 · Cited by 1,139
Application of Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) Neural Network for Flood Forecasting
Le, X.-H., Ho, H. V., Lee, G., & Jung, S. (2019) · Water · doi:10.3390/w11071387 · Cited by 889
Cited by
Assessing the Physical Realism of Deep Learning Hydrologic Model Projections Under Climate Change
Wi, S., & Steinschneider, S. (2022) · Water Resources Research · doi:10.1029/2022wr032123 · Cited by 137
Perera, U. A. K. K., Coralage, D. T. S., Ekanayake, I. U., Alawatugoda, J., & Meddage, D. P. P. (2024) · Results in Engineering · doi:10.1016/j.rineng.2024.101920 · Cited by 39
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.