Application of artificial neural networks and adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system models to short-term streamflow forecasting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present article aims to forecast streamflow by using artificial neural networks (ANNs), adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system (ANFIS), and autoregressive moving average (ARMA). For this purpose, the daily streamflow time series of two hydrometry stations of Hajighoshan and Tamar on Gorgan River are used for two periods of 1983–2007 and 1974–2007, respectively. Root mean square error (RMSE) and correlation coefficient (R) statistics are employed to evaluate the performance of the ANNs, ANFIS, and ARMA models for forecasting streamflow (1 day ahead). Comparison of the results reveals that the ANFIS model outperforms the ARMA model. Based on the results of validation stage, for the forecasting 1 day ahead streamflow, ANN with RMSE = 0.028 m3/s and R = 0.59 for the Hajighoshan station and RMSE = 0.013 m3/s and R = 0.44 for the Tamar station were found to be superior to the ANFIS with RMSE = 1.98 m3/s and R = 0.42 for the Hajighoshan station and RMSE = 2.18 m3/s and R = 0.22 for the Tamar station. In addition, for 2 day and 3 day ahead streamflow forecasts, the ANN models show superiority in the accuracy of forecasting streamflow compared with the ANFIS models.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".