4.6 Article

Prediction of Potential Evapotranspiration Using Temperature-Based Heuristic Approaches

Journal

SUSTAINABILITY
Volume 13, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/su13010297

Keywords

potential evapotranspiration; heuristic models; empirical formulation; hydrological processes; water management and sustainability

Funding

  1. National Key R&D Program of China [2016YFC0402706]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study validates the feasibility of new temperature based heuristic models for estimating monthly ET0 and compares different models in terms of accuracy.
The potential or reference evapotranspiration (ET0) is considered as one of the fundamental variables for irrigation management, agricultural planning, and modeling different hydrological pr degrees Cesses, and therefore, its accurate prediction is highly essential. The study validates the feasibility of new temperature based heuristic models (i.e., group method of data handling neural network (GMDHNN), multivariate adaptive regression spline (MARS), and M5 model tree (M5Tree)) for estimating monthly ET0. The outcomes of the newly developed models are compared with empirical formulations including Hargreaves-Samani (HS), calibrated HS, and Stephens-Stewart (SS) models based on mean absolute error (MAE), root mean square error (RMSE), and Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency. Monthly maximum and minimum temperatures (T-max and T-min) observed at two stations in Turkey are utilized as inputs for model development. In the applications, three data division scenarios are utilized and the effect of periodicity component (PC) on models' accuracies are also examined. By importing PC into the model inputs, the RMSE accuracy of GMDHNN, MARS, and M5Tree models increased by 1.4%, 8%, and 6% in one station, respectively. The GMDHNN model with periodic input provides a superior performance to the other alternatives in both stations. The recommended model reduced the average error of MARS, M5Tree, HS, CHS, and SS models with respect to RMSE by 3.7-6.4%, 10.7-3.9%, 76-75%, 10-35%, and 0.8-17% in estimating monthly ET0, respectively. The HS model provides the worst accuracy while the calibrated version significantly improves its accuracy. The GMDHNN, MARS, M5Tree, SS, and CHS models are also compared in estimating monthly mean ET0. The GMDHNN generally gave the best accuracy while the CHS provides considerably over/under-estimations. The study indicated that the only one data splitting scenario may mislead the modeler and for better validation of the heuristic methods, more data splitting scenarios should be applied.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available