2011
DOI: 10.1080/02626667.2011.559949
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Monthly rainfall–runoff modelling using artificial neural networks

Abstract: Rainfall-runoff models usually present good results, but parameter calibration sometimes is tedious and subjective, and in many cases it depends on additional data surveys in the field. An alternative to the conceptual models is provided by empirical models, which relate input and output by means of an arbitrary mathematical function that bears no direct relationship to the physical characteristics of the rainfall-runoff process. This category includes the artificial neural networks (ANNs), whose implementatio… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

0
24
0
2

Year Published

2014
2014
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 63 publications
(31 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
0
24
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Besides the conceptual MWBMs, the artificial intelligence methods are also important tools to simulate monthly rainfall-runoff processes (Komorník et al, 2006;Shu and Ouarda, 2008;Wang et al, 2009;Yilmaz et al, 2011). In some studies, artificial intelligence models exhibited better performances than conceptual MWBMs (Hsu et al, 1995;Shamseldin, 1997;Machado et al, 2011;Rezaeianzadeh et al, 2013). However, artificial intelligence models have also been criticized for their lack of explanation capability, overparameterization and over-fitting (Kaastra and Boyd, 1996;Gaume and Gosset, 2003;de Vos and Rientjes, 2005).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Besides the conceptual MWBMs, the artificial intelligence methods are also important tools to simulate monthly rainfall-runoff processes (Komorník et al, 2006;Shu and Ouarda, 2008;Wang et al, 2009;Yilmaz et al, 2011). In some studies, artificial intelligence models exhibited better performances than conceptual MWBMs (Hsu et al, 1995;Shamseldin, 1997;Machado et al, 2011;Rezaeianzadeh et al, 2013). However, artificial intelligence models have also been criticized for their lack of explanation capability, overparameterization and over-fitting (Kaastra and Boyd, 1996;Gaume and Gosset, 2003;de Vos and Rientjes, 2005).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Artificial neural networks (ANNs) are one kind of datadriven models suitable for rainfall-runoff modeling as reported in the previous studies [9][10][11]. ANNs learning the rainfall-runoff relationship through the training process can quantitatively predict the runoff without requiring the catchment characteristics.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since then, there has been an proliferation of related research including the use of radial basis function type artificial neural networks Jayawardena et al, 2006), evolutionary product unit based neural networks for hydrological time series analysis (Karunasingha et al, 2011), water level prediction using artificial neural networks (Biswas and Jayawardena, 2014), and, river flow forecasting (Tawfik et al, 1997;Abrahart and See, 2000;Imrie et al, 2000;Birikundavyi et al, 2002;Cigizoglu, 2003;Moradkhani et al, 2004;Machado et al, 2011), among others. During the last decade or so, fuzzy logic approach has been used in hydrological applications (e.g.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%