MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416443596 · doi:10.1016/j.ejrh.2025.102961

Improving estuarine discharge forecasting with a KAN-augmented LSTM model: A case study of the Yangtze River Estuary

2025· article· en· W4416443596 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Zhigao Chen, Yan Zong, Sheng-Ping Wang, Dajun Li

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hydrology Regional Studies · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrological Forecasting Using AI
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaNatural Science Foundation of Jiangxi ProvinceOntario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry
KeywordsEstuaryYangtze riverArtificial neural networkAdaptabilityLimitingNonlinear systemStreamflowDeep learningStream flow

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Xuliujing section, Yangtze River Estuary, China. Predicting discharge in tidal rivers is challenging due to complex flow dynamics influenced by topography, tides, runoff, and weather. Traditional forecasting methods struggle with fixed parameters, limiting their adaptability and accuracy over time. To address this, we propose an enhanced deep learning model, A KAN-augmented LSTM framework, which integrates a Kolmogorov-Arnold network (KAN) with a long short-term memory (LSTM) network. This model retains LSTM's ability to handle long-term dependencies while replacing the fully connected layer with a KAN layer. A learnable B-spline activation function in the KAN layer improves the model's capacity to capture nonlinear dynamics and long-term dependencies in time series data, enhancing forecasting accuracy. This paper applies the LSTM-KAN model to the Xuliujing section of the Yangtze River Estuary and compares its performance with traditional harmonic analysis (HA) and four neural network models: LSTM, XGBoost, DLinear, and Informer. The results demonstrate that the LSTM-KAN model significantly enhances discharge forecasting accuracy, outperforming all comparative methods across short-term (6 h), medium-term (12–24 h), and long-term (36–48 h) forecasts. Specifically, it achieved relative accuracy improvements of 12.1 %–35.2 % over HA and 7 %–52.8 % over the traditional LSTM model. These findings suggest that the complex interplay of tidal forcing, runoff, and weather in the Yangtze Estuary is better represented by the adaptive, function-learning paradigm of KAN than by models with fixed nonlinearities. The model's superior performance offers new insights for studying complex flow dynamics, indicating that deep learning techniques with learnable activation functions provide a more powerful and accurate tool for operational forecasting in highly dynamic tidal river environments. • This study developed an LSTM-KAN model for more accurate discharge forecasting in tidal rivers. • KAN leverages adaptive edge-weight activation to capture tidal-hydrodynamic nonlinearities with fewer parameters. • This study first embeds the architecture in hydrologic forecasting, using the Yangtze Xuliujing reach as the pilot. • The proposed model significantly outperforms traditional approaches in streamflow-forecasting accuracy.

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)0.001
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 score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.134

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Hydrology Regional StudiesSame topicHydrological Forecasting Using AIFrench-language works237,207