Probabilistic streamflow forecasting using generative deep learning models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The significance of probabilistic hydrological forecasting has grown in recent years, offering crucial insights for risk-based decision-making and effective flood management. This study explores generative deep learning models, specifically the conditional variational autoencoder (CVAE), for probabilistic streamflow forecasting. This innovative approach is applied for forecasting streamflow one to seven days (s) ahead in 75 Canadian basins included in the open-source Canadian model parameter experiment (CANOPEX) database. CVAE is compared against two benchmark quantile-based deep learning models: the quantile-based encoder-decoder (ED) and the quantile-based CVAE (QCVAE).Over 9000 deep learning models are developed based on different input variables, basin characteristics, and model structures and evaluated regarding point forecast accuracy and forecast reliability. Results highlight CVAE‘s superior reliability, showing a median reliability of 92.49% compared to 87.35% for ED and 84.59% for QCVAE (considering a desired 90% confidence level). However, quantile-based forecast models exhibit marginally better point forecasts, as evidenced by Kling-Gupta efficiency (KGE), with a median KGE of 0.90 for ED and QCVAE (compared to 0.88 for CVAE). Notably, the CVAE model provides reliable probabilistic forecasts in basins with low point forecast accuracy.The developed generative deep learning models can be used as a benchmark for probabilistic streamflow forecasting due to the use of the open-source CANOPEX dataset. Overall, the results of this study contribute to the expanding field of generative deep learning models in hydrological forecasting, offering a general framework that applies to forecasting other hydrological variables as well (precipitation and soil moisture).
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".