2011
DOI: 10.1016/j.aej.2012.01.005
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Runoff forecasting by artificial neural network and conventional model

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2

Citation Types

2
21
0
3

Year Published

2014
2014
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
4
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 81 publications
(33 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
2
21
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…The 2 coefficients obtained were 85% and 58% for calibration and validation periods, respectively. In a recent study in Pakistan where a feedforward neural network model was developed to predict the monthly runoff of an arid large watershed (9391 km 2 ) with an annual precipitation of 191 mm [38], the NS values were 0.88 and 0.63 for calibration and validation periods, respectively; these are in fairly good agreement with this study. Clearly, the rainfall-runoff processes were extremely nonlinear.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 71%
“…The 2 coefficients obtained were 85% and 58% for calibration and validation periods, respectively. In a recent study in Pakistan where a feedforward neural network model was developed to predict the monthly runoff of an arid large watershed (9391 km 2 ) with an annual precipitation of 191 mm [38], the NS values were 0.88 and 0.63 for calibration and validation periods, respectively; these are in fairly good agreement with this study. Clearly, the rainfall-runoff processes were extremely nonlinear.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 71%
“…It was known in early studies as multilayer perceptron, a basic structure with multiple dense layers. In the last few decades, several studies (Chang et al, 2015;Ömer Faruk, 2010;Sajikumar & Thandaveswara, 1999) have reported that the performances of ANN models are comparable to those of physical models, and they work well in areas with limited data (Ghumman et al, 2011). They can run fast because they do not require modeling of the internal structure (Hsu et al, 1995), and they can be more efficient with the standard support of hardware, software, and algorithm parallelization (LeCun et al, 2015).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Usually, the failure to capture flood value could possibly be overcome by having a longer data set for training. According to Ghumman et al (2011), short data sets and poor data quality are common problems in generalization of neural networks. In this study, the result of flood prediction is promising in annually scale according statistical analysis and graphical presentation.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%