The Discharge Forecasting of Multiple Monitoring Station for Humber River by Hybrid LSTM Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An early warning flood forecasting system that uses machine-learning models can be utilized for saving lives from floods, which are now exacerbated due to climate change. Flood forecasting is carried out by determining the river discharge and water level using hydrologic models at the target sites. If the water level and discharge are forecasted to reach dangerous levels, the flood forecasting system sends warning messages to residents in flood-prone areas. In the past, hybrid Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) models have been successfully used for the time series forecasting. However, the prediction errors grow exponentially with the forecasting period, making the forecast unreliable as an early warning tool with enough lead time. Therefore, this research aimed to improve the accuracy of flood forecasting models by employing real-time monitoring network datasets and establishing temporal and spatial links between adjacent monitoring stations. We evaluated the performance of the LSTM, the Convolutional Neural Networks LSTM (CNN-LSTM), the Convolutional LSTM (ConvLSTM), and the Spatio-Temporal Attention LSTM (STA-LSTM) models for flood forecasting. The dataset, employed for validation, includes hourly discharge records, from 2012 to 2017, on six stations of the Humber River in the City of Toronto, Canada. Experiments included forecasting for both 6 and 12 h ahead, using discharge data as input for the past 24 h. The STA-LSTM model’s performance was superior to the CNN-LSTM, the ConvLSTM, and the basic LSTM models when the forecast time was longer than 6 h.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".