The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Predicting Runoff Signatures Using Regression and Hydrological Modeling Approaches
Abstract
Accurate prediction of runoff signatures is important for numerous hydrological and water resources applications. However, there are lack of comprehensive evaluations of various approaches for predicting hydrological signatures. This study, for the first time, introduces regression tree ensemble approach and compares it with other three widely used approaches (multiple linear regression, multiple log‐transformed linear regression, and hydrological modeling) for assessing prediction accuracy of 13 runoff characteristics or signatures, using a large data set from 605 catchments across Australia. The climate, in particular, mean annual precipitation and aridity index, has the most significant influence on the runoff signatures. Physical catchment attributes including forest ratio, slope, and soil water holding capacity also have significant influence (p < 0.05) on the runoff signatures. All four approaches can predict the long‐term average and high flow signatures accurately. The regression approaches can also well predict majority of the other runoff signatures, with the Nash‐Sutcliffe Efficiency larger than 0.60. The regression tree ensemble outperforms the two linear regressions in predicting signatures of flow dynamics. The hydrological models, calibrated to one specific objective criterion, cannot predict many of the runoff signatures, particularly those reflecting low flows and flow dynamics. This is because in most hydrological model applications, the simulations allow satisfactory predictions of long‐term average and high flow signatures. In applications where a specific runoff signature is needed, regression relationships that directly relate that runoff signature to catchment attributes give the best predictions. Here the regression tree ensemble is overall best and offers significant potential, being able to predict most of the runoff signatures very well.
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
Ensemble methods in machine learning
Dietterich, T. G. (2000) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/3-540-45014-9_1 · Cited by 8,408
Hawkins, D. M. (2004) · Journal of Chemical Information and Computer Sciences · doi:10.1021/ci0342472 · Cited by 2,522
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
Parsimonious statistical learning models for low flow estimation
Laimighofer, J., Melcher, M., & Laaha, G. (2021) · doi:10.5194/hess-2021-481 · Cited by 30
Metadata
- Authors
- Zhang, Y., Chiew, F. H. S., Li, M., & Post, D.
- Venue
- Water Resources Research
- Publisher
- American Geophysical Union (AGU)
- Published
- 2018-10
- Volume
- 54
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 7859-7878
- ISSN
- 0043-1397 (ISSN-L)
- 1944-7973
- OpenAlex
- W2895504277
- Cited by
- 164
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 5.20
- 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: Predicting Runoff Signatures Using Regression and Hydrological Modeling Approaches. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/2018wr023325
- The paper
- Zhang, Y., Chiew, F. H. S., Li, M., & Post, D. (2018). Predicting Runoff Signatures Using Regression and Hydrological Modeling Approaches. Water Resources Research. https://doi.org/10.1029/2018wr023325
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.