MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4389885075 · doi:10.5194/hess-2023-282

Closing the data gap: runoff prediction in fully ungauged settings using LSTM

2023· preprint· en· W4389885075 on OpenAlexaff
Reyhaneh Hashemi, Pierre Javelle, Olivier Delestre, Saman Razavi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsGlobal Institute for Water SecurityUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSample (material)Computer scienceContext (archaeology)BenchmarkingGeneralizationField (mathematics)Artificial intelligenceDeep learningArtificial neural networkSurface runoffOperations researchGeologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Prediction in ungauged basins (PUB), where flow measurements are unavailable, is a critical need in hydrology and has been a focal point of extensive research efforts in this field over the past two decades. From the perspective of deep learning, PUB can be viewed as a scenario where the generalization capability of a pretrained neural network is employed to make predictions on samples that were not included in its training data set. This paper adopts this view and conducts genuine PUB using long short-term memory (LSTM) networks. Unlike PUB approaches based on k-fold training-test technique, where an arbitrary catchment B is treated as gauged in k−1 rounds and as ungauged in one round, our approach ensures that the sample for which the PUB is conducted (the UNGAUGED sample) is completely independent from the sample used to previously train the LSTMs (the GAUGED sample). The UNGAUGED sample includes 379 catchments from five hydrological regimes: Uniform, Mediterranean, Oceanic, Nivo-Pluvial, and Nival. PUB predictions are conducted using LSTMs trained both at the regime level (using only gauged catchments within a specific regime) and at the national level (using all gauged catchments). For benchmarking the performance of LSTM in PUB, four regionalized variants of the GR4J conceptual model are considered: spatial proximity, multi-attribute proximity, regime proximity, and IQ-IP-Tmin proximity, where IQ, IP, and Tmin are the indices defining the five hydrological regimes. To align with the study's fully ungauged context, the IQ index, which is also an input feature for the LSTMs, and the regime classification, crucial for the REGIME LSTMs, are reproduced under ungauged conditions using a regime-informed neural network and an XGBoost multi-class classifier respectively. The results demonstrate the overall superior performance of NATIONAL LSTMs compared to REGIME LSTMs. Among the four regionalization approaches tested for GR4J, the IQ-IP-Tmin proximity approach proves to be the most effective when analyzed on a regime-wise basis. When comparing the best-performing LSTM with the best-performing GR4J model within each regime, LSTMs show superior performance in both the Nival and Mediterranean regimes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.103
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.195 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies→French-language works237,207→