IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/waterr/v38y2024i4d10.1007_s11269-023-03730-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparison of Classical and Machine Learning Methods in Estimation of Missing Streamflow Data

Author

Listed:
  • A. B. Dariane

    (K.N. Toosi University of Technology)

  • M. I. Borhan

    (K.N. Toosi University of Technology)

Abstract

Recovering missing data and access to a complete and accurate streamflow data is of great importance in water resources management. This article aims to comparatively investigate the application of different classical and machine learning-based methods in recovering missing streamflow data in three mountainous basins in northern Iran using 26 years of data duration extending from 1991 to 2017. These include Taleghan, Karaj, and Latyan basins that provide municipal water for the capital Tehran. Two periods of artificial gaps of data were considered to avoid possible duration-based impacts that may affect the results. For this purpose, several methods are investigated including simple and multiple linear regressions (LR & MLR), artificial neural network (ANN) with five different structures, support vector regression (SVR), M5 tree and two Adaptive Neuro-Fuzzy Inference System (ANFIS) comprising Subtractive (Sub-ANFIS) and fuzzy C-means (FCM-ANFIS) classification. Although these methods have been used in different problems in the past, but the comparison of all these methods and the application of ANFIS using two clustering methods in missing data is new. Overall, it was noticed that machine learning-based methods yield better outputs. For instance, in the Taleghan basin and in the gap during 2014–2017 period it shows that the evaluation criteria of Root Mean Square Error (RMSE), Nash–Sutcliffe Index (NSE) and Coefficient of Determination $${({\text{R}}}^{2})$$ ( R 2 ) for the Sub-ANFIS method are 1.67 $${{\text{m}}}^{3}/s$$ m 3 / s , 0.96 and 0.97, respectively, while these values for the LR are 3.46 $${{\text{m}}}^{3}/s$$ m 3 / s , 0.83 and 0.87 respectively. Also, in Latyan basin during the gap of 1991–1994, FCM-ANFIS was found to be the best method to recover the missing monthly flow data with RMSE, NSE and $${{\text{R}}}^{2}$$ R 2 criteria as 3.17 $${{\text{m}}}^{3}/s$$ m 3 / s , 0.88 and 0.92, respectively. In addition, results indicated that using the seasonal index in the artificial neural network model improves the estimations. Finally, a Social Choice (SC) method using the Borda count was employed to evaluate the overall performance of all methods.

Suggested Citation

  • A. B. Dariane & M. I. Borhan, 2024. "Comparison of Classical and Machine Learning Methods in Estimation of Missing Streamflow Data," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 38(4), pages 1453-1478, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:waterr:v:38:y:2024:i:4:d:10.1007_s11269-023-03730-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s11269-023-03730-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11269-023-03730-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11269-023-03730-7?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:waterr:v:38:y:2024:i:4:d:10.1007_s11269-023-03730-7. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.