Ann output updating of lumped conceptual rainfall/runoff forecasting models

被引:32
作者
Anctil, F
Perrin, C
Andréassian, V
机构
[1] Univ Laval, Dept Genie Civil, Quebec City, PQ G1K 7P4, Canada
[2] Irstea, Water Qaul & Hydrol Res Unit, F-92163 Antony, France
来源
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN WATER RESOURCES ASSOCIATION | 2003年 / 39卷 / 05期
关键词
surface-water hydrology; modeling; model output updating; rainfall/runoff; artificial neural networks;
D O I
10.1111/j.1752-1688.2003.tb03708.x
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Artificial neural networks (ANNs) are tested for the output updating of one-day-ahead and three-day-ahead streamflow forecasts derived from three lumped conceptual rainfall/runoff (RR) models: the GR4J, the IHAC, and the TOPMO. ANN output updating proved superior to a parameter updating scheme and to the 'simple' output updating scheme, which always replicates the last observed forecast error. In fact, ANN output updating was able to compensate for large differences in the initial performance of the three tested lumped conceptual R-R models, which the other tested updating approaches were not able to achieve. This is done mainly by incorporating input vectors usually exploited for ANN R-R modeling such as previous rainfall and streamflow observations, in addition to the previous observed error. For one-day-ahead forecasts, the performance of all three lumped conceptual R-R models, used in conjunction with ANN output updating, was equivalent to that of the ANN R-R model. For three-day-ahead forecasts, the performance of the ANN-output-updated conceptual models was even superior to that of the ANN R-R model, revealing that the conceptual models are probably performing some tasks that the ANN R-R model cannot map. However, further testing is needed to substantiate the last statement.
引用
收藏
页码:1269 / 1279
页数:11
相关论文
共 41 条
[1]   Impact of imperfect rainfall knowledge on the efficiency and the parameters of watershed models [J].
Andréassian, V ;
Perrin, C ;
Michel, C ;
Usart-Sanchez, I ;
Lavabre, J .
JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGY, 2001, 250 (1-4) :206-223
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2001, Rainfall-runoff Modelling, The Primer
[3]  
[Anonymous], 1970, J Hydrol, V10, DOI [DOI 10.1016/0022-1694(70)90255-6, 10.1016/0022-1694(70)90255-6]
[4]  
[Anonymous], P 1997 INT JOINT C N, DOI DOI 10.1109/ICNN.1997.614194
[5]   Neural networks as routine for error updating of numerical models [J].
Babovic, V ;
Canizares, R ;
Jensen, HR ;
Klinting, A .
JOURNAL OF HYDRAULIC ENGINEERING, 2001, 127 (03) :181-193
[6]  
Bertsekas D. P., 1996, Neuro Dynamic Programming, V1st
[7]  
Beven K.J., 1979, HYDROL SCI B, V24, P43, DOI [DOI 10.1080/02626667909491834, 10.1080/02626667909491834]
[8]   COMPARISON OF 6 RAINFALL-RUNOFF MODELING APPROACHES [J].
CHIEW, FHS ;
STEWARDSON, MJ ;
MCMAHON, TA .
JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGY, 1993, 147 (1-4) :1-36
[9]  
CORRADINI C, 1986, WATER RESOUR BULL, V22, P1031
[10]   Hydrological forecasting with artificial neural networks:: The state of the art [J].
Coulibaly, P ;
Anctil, F ;
Bobée, B .
CANADIAN JOURNAL OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, 1999, 26 (03) :293-304