Sourcing CHIRPS precipitation data for streamflow forecasting using intrinsic time-scale decomposition based machine learning models

References

• Adamowski, J. and Sun, K., 2010. Development of a coupled wavelet transform and neural network method for flow forecasting of non-perennial rivers in semi-arid watersheds. Journal of Hydrology, 390 (1–2), 85–91. doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2010.06.033
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adnan, R.M., et al., 2020. Least square support vector machine and multivariate adaptive regression splines for streamflow prediction in mountainous basin using hydro-meteorological data as inputs. Journal of Hydrology, 586, 124371. doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2019.124371
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adnan, R.M., et al., 2019. Daily streamflow prediction using optimally pruned extreme learning machine. Journal of Hydrology, 577, 123981. doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2019.123981
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anastasakis, L. and Mort, N., 2001. The development of self-organization techniques in modelling: a review of the Group Method of Data Handling (GMDH). UK: Department of Automatic Control & Systems Engineering, The University of Sheffield, Tech. Rep. 813.
   Google Scholar
• Ashouri, H., et al., 2015. PERSIANN-CDR: daily precipitation climate data record from multisatellite observations for hydrological and climate studies. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 96 (1), 69–83. doi:10.1175/BAMS-D-13-00068.1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Band, S.S., et al., 2020. Flash flood susceptibility modeling using new approaches of hybrid and ensemble tree-based machine learning algorithms. Remote Sensing, 12 (21), 3568. doi:10.3390/rs12213568
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beck, H.E., et al., 2017a. MSWEP: 3-hourly 0.25 global gridded precipitation (1979–2015) by merging gauge, satellite, and reanalysis data. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 21 (1), 589–615. doi:10.5194/hess-21-589-2017
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beck, H.E., et al., 2017b. Global-scale evaluation of 22 precipitation datasets using gauge observations and hydrological modeling. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 21 (12), 6201. doi:10.5194/hess-21-6201-2017
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Biau, G. and Scornet, E., 2016. A random forest guided tour. Test, 25 (2), 197–227. doi:10.1007/s11749-016-0481-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Breiman, L., 2001. Random forests. Machine Learning, 45 (1), 5–32. doi:10.1023/A:1010933404324
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chiang, Y.M., Chang, L.C., and Chang, F.J., 2004. Comparison of static-feedforward and dynamic feedback neural networks for rainfall–runoff modeling. Journal of Hydrology, 290 (3–4), 297–311. doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2003.12.033
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cloke, H. and Pappenberger, F., 2009. Ensemble flood forecasting: a review. Journal of Hydrology, 375 (3–4), 613–626. doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2009.06.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dag, O. and Yozgatligil, C., 2016. GMDH: an R package for short term forecasting via GMDH-type neural network algorithms. The R Journal, 8 (1), 379–386. doi:10.32614/RJ-2016-028
   Google Scholar
• Di, C., Yang, X., and Wang, X., 2014. A four-stage hybrid model for hydrological time series forecasting. PloS One, 9 (8), e104663. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0104663
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Famili, A., et al., 1997. Data preprocessing and intelligent data analysis. Intelligent Data Analysis, 1 (1), 3–23. doi:10.3233/IDA-1997-1102
   Google Scholar
• Farlow, S.J., 1984. Self-organizing methods in modeling: GMDH type algorithms, Statistics: Textbooks and Monographs, Vol. 54. New York: Marcel Dekker.
   Google Scholar
• Frei, M.G. and Osorio, I., 2006. Method, computer program, and system for intrinsic timescale decomposition, filtering, and automated analysis of signals of arbitrary origin or timescale, Available from: https://patents.google.com/patent/US7054792/en, US Patent 7054792B2.
   Google Scholar
• Frei, M.G. and Osorio, I., 2007. Intrinsic time-scale decomposition: time–frequency–energy analysis and real-time filtering of non-stationary signals. Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 463 (2078), 321–342. doi:10.1098/rspa.2006.1761
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fu, M., et al., 2020. Deep learning data intelligence model based on adjusted forecasting window scale: application in daily streamflow simulation. IEEE Access, 8, 32632–32651. doi:10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2974406
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Funk, C., et al., 2015. The climate hazards InfraRed precipitation with stations—a new environmental record for monitoring extremes. Scientific Data, 2 (1), 1–21. doi:10.1038/sdata.2015.66
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gautam, D. and Holz, K.P., 2001. Rainfall-runoff modelling using adaptive neuro-fuzzy systems. Journal of Hydroinformatics, 3 (1), 3–10. doi:10.2166/hydro.2001.0002
   Google Scholar
• Gorelick, N., et al., 2017. Google earth engine: planetary-scale geospatial analysis for everyone. Remote Sensing of Environment, 202, 18–27. doi:10.1016/j.rse.2017.06.031
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Govindasamy, R., 1991. Univariate box-Jenkins forecasts of water discharge in Missouri river. International Journal of Water Resources Development, 7 (3), 168–177. doi:10.1080/07900629108722509
   Google Scholar
• Han, J., Kamber, M., and Pei, J., 2012. Data preprocessing. In: J. Han, M. Kamber, and J. Pei, eds. Data mining. 3rd ed. Boston: Morgan Kaufmann, The Morgan Kaufmann Series in Data Management Systems, 83–124.
   Google Scholar
• He, X., et al., 2019. Daily runoff forecasting using a hybrid model based on variational mode decomposition and deep neural networks. Water Resources Management, 33 (4), 1571–1590. doi:10.1007/s11269-019-2183-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• He, Z., et al., 2014. A comparative study of artificial neural network, adaptive neuro fuzzy inference system and support vector machine for forecasting river flow in the semiarid mountain region. Journal of Hydrology, 509, 379–386. doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2013.11.054
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hosseini, F.S., et al., 2020. Flash-flood hazard assessment using ensembles and Bayesian-based machine learning models: application of the simulated annealing feature selection method. Science of the Total Environment, 711, 135161. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.135161
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hou, A.Y., et al., 2014. The global precipitation measurement mission. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 95 (5), 701–722. doi:10.1175/BAMS-D-13-00164.1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hsu, K.L., Gupta, H.V., and Sorooshian, S., 1995. Artificial neural network modeling of the rainfall runoff process. Water Resources Research, 31 (10), 2517–2530. doi:10.1029/95WR01955
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang, S., et al., 2014. Monthly streamflow prediction using modified EMD-based support vector machine. Journal of Hydrology, 511, 764–775. doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2014.01.062
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huffman, G.J., et al., 2007. The TRMM multisatellite precipitation analysis (TMPA): quasi-global, multiyear, combined-sensor precipitation estimates at fine scales. Journal of Hydrometeorology, 8 (1), 38–55. doi:10.1175/JHM560.1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ivakhnenko, A.G. and Ivakhnenko, G.A., 1995. The review of problems solvable by algorithms of the Group Method of Data Handling (GMDH). Pattern Recognition and Image Analysis, 5, 527–535.
   Google Scholar
• Jeihouni, M., Toomanian, A., and Mansourian, A., 2020. Decision tree-based data mining and rule induction for identifying high quality groundwater zones to water supply management: a novel hybrid use of data mining and GIS. Water Resources Management, 34 (1), 139–154. doi:10.1007/s11269-019-02447-w
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Joyce, R.J., et al., 2004. CMORPH: a method that produces global precipitation estimates from passive microwave and infrared data at high spatial and temporal resolution. Journal of Hydrometeorology, 5 (3), 487–503. doi:10.1175/1525-7541(2004)005<0487:CAMTPG>2.0.CO;2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kao, I.F., et al., 2020. Exploring a long short-term memory based encoder-decoder framework for multi-step-ahead flood forecasting. Journal of Hydrology, 583, 124631. doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2020.124631
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kass, G.V., 1980. An exploratory technique for investigating large quantities of categorical data. Applied Statistics, 29 (2), 119–127. doi:10.2307/2986296
   Google Scholar
• Khatibi, R., Ghorbani, M.A., and Pourhosseini, F.A., 2017. Stream flow predictions using nature inspired firefly algorithms and a multiple model strategy–directions of innovation towards next generation practices. Advanced Engineering Informatics, 34, 80–89. doi:10.1016/j.aei.2017.10.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kirchner, J.W. and Allen, S.T., 2020. Seasonal partitioning of precipitation between streamflow and evapotranspiration, inferred from end-member splitting analysis. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 24, 17–39. doi:10.5194/hess-24-17-2020
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kisi, Ö., 2008. Stream flow forecasting using neuro-wavelet technique. Hydrological Processes: An International Journal, 22 (20), 4142–4152. doi:10.1002/hyp.7014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krstanovic, P.F. and Singh, V.P., 1991. A univariate model for long-term streamflow forecasting. Stochastic Hydrology and Hydraulics, 5 (3), 189–205. doi:10.1007/BF01544057
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Le, A.M. and Pricope, N.G., 2017. Increasing the accuracy of runoff and streamflow simulation in the Nzoia basin, Western Kenya, through the incorporation of satellite-derived CHIRPS data. Water, 9 (2), 114. doi:10.3390/w9020114
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, X., Sha, J., and Wang, Z.L., 2019. Comparison of daily streamflow forecasts using extreme learning machines and the random forest method. Hydrological Sciences Journal, 64 (15), 1857–1866.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu, D., et al., 2020. Streamflow prediction using deep learning neural network: case study of Yangtze river. IEEE Access, 8, 90069–90086. doi:10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2993874
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Louppe, G., 2014. Understanding random forests: from theory to practice. arXiv preprint, arXiv:1407.7502. Available from: https://arxiv.org/abs/1407.7502 [Accessed 14 November 2020].
   Google Scholar
• Malik, A., et al., 2020. Support vector regression optimized by meta-heuristic algorithms for daily streamflow prediction. Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment, 34 (11), 1755–1773. doi:10.1007/s00477-020-01874-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mehr, A.D., 2018. An improved gene expression programming model for streamflow forecasting in intermittent streams. Journal of Hydrology, 563, 669–678. doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2018.06.049
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Milanovic, M. and Stamenkovic, M., 2016. CHAID decision tree: methodological frame and application. Economic Themes, 54 (4), 563–586. doi:10.1515/ethemes-2016-0029
   Google Scholar
• Moeeni, H., et al., 2017. Assessment of stochastic models and a hybrid artificial neural network-genetic algorithm method in forecasting monthly reservoir inflow. INAE Letters, 2 (1), 13–23. doi:10.1007/s41403-017-0017-9
   Google Scholar
• Mohan, S. and Vedula, S., 1995. Multiplicative seasonal ARIMA model for long term forecasting of inflows. Water Resources Management, 9 (2), 115–126. doi:10.1007/BF00872463
   Google Scholar
• Moradkhani, H. and Sorooshian, S., 2009. General review of rainfall-runoff modeling: model calibration, data assimilation, and uncertainty analysis. In: S. Sorooshian, et al., eds.. Hydrological modelling and the water cycle, Vol. 63. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, Water Science and Technology Library, 1–24.
   Google Scholar
• Mujumdar, P.P. and Kumar, D.N., 1990. Stochastic models of streamflow: some case studies. Hydrological Sciences Journal, 35 (4), 395–410. doi:10.1080/02626669009492442
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nanda, T., et al., 2016. A wavelet-based non-linear autoregressive with exogenous inputs (WNARX) dynamic neural network model for real-time flood forecasting using satellite-based rainfall products. Journal of Hydrology, 539, 57–73. doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2016.05.014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nayak, P.C., et al., 2004. A neuro-fuzzy computing technique for modeling hydrological time series. Journal of Hydrology, 291 (1–2), 52–66. doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2003.12.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nguyen, V.N., et al., 2020. A new modeling approach for spatial prediction of flash flood with biogeography optimized CHAID tree ensemble and remote sensing data. Remote Sensing, 12 (9), 1373. doi:10.3390/rs12091373
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Noakes, D.J., McLeod, A.I., and Hipel, K.W., 1985. Forecasting monthly river flow time series. International Journal of Forecasting, 1 (2), 179–190. doi:10.1016/0169-2070(85)90022-6
   Google Scholar
• Nourani, V., et al., 2014. Applications of hybrid wavelet–artificial intelligence models in hydrology: a review. Journal of Hydrology, 514, 358–377. doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2014.03.057
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Onwubolu, G.C., 2016. GMDH multilayered algorithm. In: G.C. Onwubolu, ed.. GMDH-methodology and implementation in MATLAB. Massachusetts: Imperial College Press, 27–74.
   Google Scholar
• Pai, D.S., et al., 2014. Development of a new high spatial resolution (0.25°×0.25°) long period (1901–2010) daily gridded rainfall data set over India and its comparison with existing data sets over the region. Mausam, 65 (1), 1–18.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pavlov, Y.L., 2000. Random forests. Netherlands: VSP.
   Google Scholar
• Rezaie-Balf, M., et al., 2020. Physicochemical parameters data assimilation for efficient improvement of water quality index prediction: comparative assessment of a noise suppression hybridization approach. Journal of Cleaner Production, 271, 122576. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122576
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rezaie-Balf, M., et al., 2019a. An ensemble decomposition-based artificial intelligence approach for daily streamflow prediction. Water, 11 (4), 709. doi:10.3390/w11040709
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rezaie-Balf, M., et al., 2019b. Enhancing streamflow forecasting using the augmenting ensemble procedure coupled machine learning models: case study of Aswan High Dam. Hydrological Sciences Journal, 64 (13), 1629–1646. doi:10.1080/02626667.2019.1661417
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Riggs, H.C., 1985. Applications of hydrologic data. In: H.C. Riggs, ed.. Streamflow characteristics, Vol. 22. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier, Developments in Water Science, 207–237.
   Google Scholar
• Ritschard, G., 2013. CHAID and earlier supervised tree methods. In: J.J. McArdle and G. Ritschard, eds. Contemporary issues in exploratory data mining in the behavioral sciences. New york: Routledge, 70–96.
   Google Scholar
• Santos, C.A.G., et al., 2019. Hybrid wavelet neural network approach for daily inflow forecasting using tropical rainfall measuring mission data. Journal of Hydrologic Engineering, 24 (2), 04018062. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0001725
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scornet, E., 2015. Learning with random forests. Ph.D. thesis. Université Pierre et Marie Curie, Paris.
   Google Scholar
• Shabri, A., and Suhartono, 2012. Streamflow forecasting using least-squares support vector machines. Hydrological Sciences Journal, 57 (7), 1275–1293. doi:10.1080/02626667.2012.714468
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sharma, A., Tarboton, D.G., and Lall, U., 1997. Streamflow simulation: a nonparametric approach. Water Resources Research, 33 (2), 291–308. doi:10.1029/96WR02839
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sivapragasam, C., Liong, S.Y., and Pasha, M., 2001. Rainfall and runoff forecasting with SSA–SVM approach. Journal of Hydroinformatics, 3 (3), 141–152. doi:10.2166/hydro.2001.0014
   Google Scholar
• Statsoft, 2020. CHAID analysis. Available from: https://store.fmi.uni-sofia.bg/fmi/statist/education/textbook/eng/stchaid.html [Accessed 21 April 2020].
   Google Scholar
• Sulugodu, B. and Deka, P.C., 2019. Evaluating the performance of CHIRPS satellite rainfall data for streamflow forecasting. Water Resources Management, 33 (11), 3913–3927. doi:10.1007/s11269-019-02340-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taylor, K.E., 2001. Summarizing multiple aspects of model performance in a single diagram. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 106 (D7), 7183–7192. doi:10.1029/2000JD900719
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thomas, D. and Benson, M., 1970. Generalization of streamflow characteristics from drainage-basin characteristics. Washington, DC: US Department of the Interior, Tech. rep..
   Google Scholar
• Tikhamarine, Y., et al., 2020. Improving artificial intelligence models accuracy for monthly streamflow forecasting using grey wolf optimization (GWO) algorithm. Journal of Hydrology, 582, 124435. doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2019.124435
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tiwari, M.K. and Chatterjee, C., 2011. A new wavelet–bootstrap–ANN hybrid model for daily discharge forecasting. Journal of Hydroinformatics, 13 (3), 500–519. doi:10.2166/hydro.2010.142
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tuo, Y., et al., 2016. Evaluation of precipitation input for SWAT modeling in Alpine catchment: a case study in the Adige river basin (Italy). Science of the Total Environment, 573, 66–82. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.08.034
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ushio, T., et al., 2009. A Kalman filter approach to the Global Satellite Mapping of Precipitation (GSMaP) from combined passive microwave and infrared radiometric data. Journal of the Meteorological Society of Japan. Ser. II, 87A, 137–151. doi:10.2151/jmsj.87A.137
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Diepen, M. and Franses, P.H., 2006. Evaluating Chi-squared automatic interaction detection. Information Systems, 31 (8), 814–831. doi:10.1016/j.is.2005.03.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, W.C., et al., 2015. Improving forecasting accuracy of annual runoff time series using ARIMA based on EEMD decomposition. Water Resources Management, 29 (8), 2655–2675. doi:10.1007/s11269-015-0962-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, Z., et al., 2020. Monthly streamflow prediction using a hybrid stochastic-deterministic approach for parsimonious non-linear time series modeling. Engineering Applications of Computational Fluid Mechanics, 14 (1), 1351–1372. doi:10.1080/19942060.2020.1830858
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xie, T., et al., 2019. Hybrid forecasting model for non-stationary daily runoff series: a case study in the Han River Basin, China. Journal of Hydrology, 577, 123915. doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2019.123915
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yaseen, Z.M., et al., 2018. Complementary data-intelligence model for river flow simulation. Journal of Hydrology, 567, 180–190. doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2018.10.020
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yaseen, Z.M., et al., 2017. Novel approach for streamflow forecasting using a hybrid ANFIS-FFA model. Journal of Hydrology, 554, 263–276. doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2017.09.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yaseen, Z.M., et al., 2015. Artificial intelligence based models for streamflow forecasting: 2000–2015. Journal of Hydrology, 530, 829–844. doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.10.038
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yaseen, Z.M., et al., 2019a. Implementation of univariate paradigm for streamflow simulation using hybrid data-driven model: case study in tropical region. IEEE Access, 7, 74471–74481. doi:10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2920916
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yaseen, Z.M., et al., 2020. Hourly river flow forecasting: application of emotional neural network versus multiple machine learning paradigms. Water Resources Management, 34 (3), 1075–1091. doi:10.1007/s11269-020-02484-w
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yaseen, Z.M., et al., 2019b. An enhanced extreme learning machine model for river flow forecasting: state-of-the-art, practical applications in water resource engineering area and future research direction. Journal of Hydrology, 569, 387–408. doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2018.11.069
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yin, Z., et al., 2018. Design and evaluation of SVR, MARS and M5Tree models for 1, 2 and 3-day lead time forecasting of river flow data in a semiarid mountainous catchment. Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment, 32 (9), 2457–2476. doi:10.1007/s00477-018-1585-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zounemat-Kermani, M., et al., 2020a. Neurocomputing in surface water hydrology and hydraulics: a review of two decades retrospective, current status and future prospects. Journal of Hydrology, 588, 125085. doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2020.125085
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zounemat-Kermani, M., et al., 2020b. Ensemble data mining modeling in corrosion of concrete sewer: a comparative study of network-based (MLPNN & RBFNN) and tree-based (RF, CHAID, & CART) models. Advanced Engineering Informatics, 43, 101030. doi:10.1016/j.aei.2019.101030
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar