4.2 Article

Comparison of random forests and other statistical methods for the prediction of lake water level: a case study of the Poyang Lake in China

Journal

HYDROLOGY RESEARCH
Volume 47, Issue -, Pages 69-83

Publisher

IWA PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.2166/nh.2016.264

Keywords

artificial neural networks; lake water level; Poyang Lake; random forests; support vector regression; variable importance analysis

Funding

  1. National Basic Research Program of China (973 Program) [2012CB417006]
  2. National Scientific Foundation of China [41271500, 41571107]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Modeling of hydrological time series is essential for sustainable development and management of lake water resources. This study aims to develop an efficient model for forecasting lake water level variations, exemplified by the Poyang Lake (China) case study. A random forests (RF) model was first applied and compared with artificial neural networks, support vector regression, and a linear model. Three scenarios were adopted to investigate the effect of time lag and previous water levels as model inputs for real-time forecasting. Variable importance was then analyzed to evaluate the influence of each predictor for water level variations. Results indicated that the RF model exhibits the best performance for daily forecasting in terms of root mean square error (RMSE) and coefficient of determination (R-2). Moreover, the highest accuracy was achieved using discharge series at 4-day-ahead and the average water level over the previous week as model inputs, with an average RMSE of 0.25 m for five stations within the lake. In addition, the previous water level was the most efficient predictor for water level forecasting, followed by discharge from the Yangtze River. Based on the performance of the soft computing methods, RF can be calibrated to provide information or simulation scenarios for water management and decision-making.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available