AI‐based runoff simulation based on remote sensing observations: A case study of two river basins in the United States and Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Data‐driven techniques are used extensively for hydrologic time‐series prediction. We created various data‐driven models (DDMs) based on machine learning: long short‐term memory (LSTM), support vector regression (SVR), extreme learning machines, and an artificial neural network with backpropagation, to define the optimal approach to predicting streamflow time series in the Carson River (California, USA) and Montmorency (Canada) catchments. The moderate resolution imaging spectroradiometer (MODIS) snow‐coverage dataset was applied to improve the streamflow estimate. In addition to the DDMs, the conceptual snowmelt runoff model was applied to simulate and forecast daily streamflow. The four main predictor variables, namely snow‐coverage (S‐C), precipitation (P), maximum temperature (Tmax), and minimum temperature (Tmin), and their corresponding values for each river basin, were obtained from National Climatic Data Center and National Snow and Ice Data Center to develop the model. The most relevant predictor variable was chosen using the support vector machine‐recursive feature elimination feature selection approach. The results show that incorporating the MODIS snow‐coverage dataset improves the models' prediction accuracies in the snowmelt‐dominated basin. SVR and LSTM exhibited the best performances (root mean square error = 8.63 and 9.80) using monthly and daily snowmelt time series, respectively. In summary, machine learning is a reliable method to forecast runoff as it can be employed in global climate forecasts that require high‐volume data processing.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".