Prediction of suspended sediment concentration in fluvial flows using novel hybrid deep learning model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accurately predicting suspended sediment concentration (SSC) in fluvial systems is essential for environmental monitoring, flood management, and riverine engineering applications. This study introduces a novel hybrid approach for forecasting SSC by leveraging advanced deep learning algorithms. Daily datasets from the U.S. Geological Survey, including discharge (Q) and SSC measurements, were analyzed from 2007 to 2017 at two key locations on the Mississippi River: Chester (CH) and Thebes (TH). The proposed framework integrates feedforward neural networks (FFNN), long short-term memory (LSTM) networks, stochastic gradient descent (SGD), and radial basis function (RBF) models, augmented with a first-order differencing technique. Additionally, hybrid models—SFFNN-LSTM and SFFNN-SGD—were developed to enhance predictive performance. The dataset was partitioned into training (70%, 2,747 d) and testing (30%, 1,178 d) subsets, with daily temporal resolution. Six input scenarios incorporating lagged parameters were evaluated using performance metrics, including the correlation coefficient (CC), Nash–Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE), scatter index (SI), and Willmott’s index (WI). Sensitivity analysis identified SSCt-1 as the most influential predictor for short-term forecasting. Among the models, the SFFNN-LSTM-6 achieved the highest performance, with CC values of 0.976 for CH and 0.960 for TH, demonstrating the ability to predict SSC effectively even in the absence of current-day discharge data. The proposed hybrid models exhibited exceptional robustness across diverse flow regimes, including extreme environmental conditions, establishing a reliable tool for SSC forecasting in complex fluvial systems. • Machine learning techniques are used for sediment concentration predictions in fluvial systems. • Hybrid machine learning approaches can robustly predict suspended sediment concentration. • Sensitivity analysis shows (SSC t-1 ) is most influential in predicting sediment concentration in rivers. • SFFNN-LSTM-6 model can accurately predict SSC in data-scarce conditions. • Our proposed model improved SSC predictions across varying flow 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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".