MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409640784 · doi:10.1371/journal.pwat.0000359

Improved streamflow prediction accuracy in Boreal climate watershed using a LSTM model: A comparative study

2025· article· en· W4409640784 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Kamal Islam, J. A. Daraio, Mumtaz Cheema, Gabriela Sabau, Lakshman Galagedara

Bibliographic record

VenuePLOS Water · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMemorial University of Newfoundland
KeywordsStreamflowWatershedBorealStream flowClimatologyEnvironmental scienceTaigaClimate changeMeteorologyHydrology (agriculture)GeographyComputer scienceMachine learningGeologyCartographyOceanographyDrainage basinForestryArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Streamflow plays a vital role in water resource management and environmental impact assessment. This study is a novel application of the Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) model, a type of recurrent neural network, for real-time streamflow prediction in the Upper Humber River Watershed in western Newfoundland. It also compares the performance of the LSTM model with the physically based SWAT model. The LSTM model was optimized by tuning hyperparameters and adjusting the window size to balance capturing historical data and ensuring prediction stability. Using single input variables such as daily average temperature or precipitation, the LSTM achieved a high Nash-Sutcliffe Efficiency (NSE) of 0.95. In comparison, the results show that the LSTM model delivers a more competitive performance, achieving an NSE of 0.95 versus SWAT’s 0.77, and a percent bias (PBIAS) of 0.62 compared to SWAT’s 8.26. Unlike SWAT, the LSTM model does not overestimate high flows and excels in predicting low flows. Additionally, the LSTM successfully predicted daily streamflow using real-time data. Despite challenges in interpretability and generalizability, the LSTM model demonstrated strong performance, particularly during extreme events, making it a valuable tool for streamflow prediction in cold climates where accurate forecasts are crucial for effective water management. This study highlights the potential of the LSTM model’s application to water resource management.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.111
Threshold uncertainty score0.220

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLOS WaterSame topicHydrology and Watershed Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207