使用机器学习方法预测地下水位:加州中央河谷案例

IF 3.1 Q2 GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Gabriela May-Lagunes , Valerie Chau , Eric Ellestad , Leyla Greengard , Paolo D'Odorico , Puya Vahabi , Alberto Todeschini , Manuela Girotto
{"title":"使用机器学习方法预测地下水位:加州中央河谷案例","authors":"Gabriela May-Lagunes ,&nbsp;Valerie Chau ,&nbsp;Eric Ellestad ,&nbsp;Leyla Greengard ,&nbsp;Paolo D'Odorico ,&nbsp;Puya Vahabi ,&nbsp;Alberto Todeschini ,&nbsp;Manuela Girotto","doi":"10.1016/j.hydroa.2023.100161","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Groundwater, the second largest stock of freshwater on the planet, is an important water source used for municipal water supply, irrigation, or industrial needs. For instance, California’s arid Central Valley relies on groundwater resources to produce a quarter of the United States’ food demand as farmers rely on this precious resource when surface water is scarce. Despite its importance, the nexus between groundwater dynamics and climate drivers remains difficult to quantify, model, and predict because of the lack of a comprehensive observation network. In this study, machine learning techniques were used to predict groundwater levels with a 3-month forecasting horizon for the Sacramento River Basin. For this, publicly available meteorological and hydrological datasets and in-situ well-level measurements were used. Time series, ensemble-based, and deep-learning models including transformers were all tested, with an ensemble-based, XGBoost model, producing the best mean standard deviation percent error (MSPE) of 32.23% and a root mean squared error (RMSE) of 1.05 m (m) when using a 3- month forecasting horizon and when tested using a monthly rolling window over the years 2017–2020. The model proved to be better at predicting into wet months than the dry summer months and was found to be better at extracting seasonality than explaining well-level residuals, with well-specific features, as opposed to exogenous meteorological features specific to the hydrological unit of the well, ranking as the most important features to the model. Though other forecasting horizons were tested, a 3-month look-ahead window resulted in the best balance of precision and accuracy, where smaller forecasting horizons resulted in smaller RMSE but larger MSPE scores and vice-versa for larger forecasting horizons.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":36948,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Hydrology X","volume":"21 ","pages":"Article 100161"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589915523000147/pdfft?md5=aab140af4d0a28517df303e628b13bca&pid=1-s2.0-S2589915523000147-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Forecasting groundwater levels using machine learning methods: The case of California’s Central Valley\",\"authors\":\"Gabriela May-Lagunes ,&nbsp;Valerie Chau ,&nbsp;Eric Ellestad ,&nbsp;Leyla Greengard ,&nbsp;Paolo D'Odorico ,&nbsp;Puya Vahabi ,&nbsp;Alberto Todeschini ,&nbsp;Manuela Girotto\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.hydroa.2023.100161\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Groundwater, the second largest stock of freshwater on the planet, is an important water source used for municipal water supply, irrigation, or industrial needs. For instance, California’s arid Central Valley relies on groundwater resources to produce a quarter of the United States’ food demand as farmers rely on this precious resource when surface water is scarce. Despite its importance, the nexus between groundwater dynamics and climate drivers remains difficult to quantify, model, and predict because of the lack of a comprehensive observation network. In this study, machine learning techniques were used to predict groundwater levels with a 3-month forecasting horizon for the Sacramento River Basin. For this, publicly available meteorological and hydrological datasets and in-situ well-level measurements were used. Time series, ensemble-based, and deep-learning models including transformers were all tested, with an ensemble-based, XGBoost model, producing the best mean standard deviation percent error (MSPE) of 32.23% and a root mean squared error (RMSE) of 1.05 m (m) when using a 3- month forecasting horizon and when tested using a monthly rolling window over the years 2017–2020. The model proved to be better at predicting into wet months than the dry summer months and was found to be better at extracting seasonality than explaining well-level residuals, with well-specific features, as opposed to exogenous meteorological features specific to the hydrological unit of the well, ranking as the most important features to the model. Though other forecasting horizons were tested, a 3-month look-ahead window resulted in the best balance of precision and accuracy, where smaller forecasting horizons resulted in smaller RMSE but larger MSPE scores and vice-versa for larger forecasting horizons.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36948,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Hydrology X\",\"volume\":\"21 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100161\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589915523000147/pdfft?md5=aab140af4d0a28517df303e628b13bca&pid=1-s2.0-S2589915523000147-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Hydrology X\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589915523000147\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Hydrology X","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589915523000147","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

地下水是地球上第二大淡水储量,是用于市政供水、灌溉或工业需求的重要水源。例如,加利福尼亚干旱的中央河谷依靠地下水资源生产的粮食占美国粮食需求的四分之一,因为在地表水稀缺的情况下,农民依赖这一宝贵资源。尽管地下水动态与气候驱动因素之间的关系非常重要,但由于缺乏全面的观测网络,因此仍难以对其进行量化、建模和预测。本研究采用机器学习技术预测萨克拉门托河流域 3 个月预报期的地下水位。为此,使用了可公开获取的气象和水文数据集以及现场井水水位测量数据。对包括变压器在内的时间序列模型、基于集合的模型和深度学习模型都进行了测试,其中基于集合的 XGBoost 模型在使用 3 个月的预测范围和使用 2017-2020 年的月滚动窗口进行测试时,产生了 32.23% 的最佳平均标准偏差百分比误差(MSPE)和 1.05 米的均方根误差(RMSE)。事实证明,该模型对潮湿月份的预测能力优于对夏季干旱月份的预测能力,并且发现该模型在提取季节性方面优于解释井级残差,井的特定特征,而不是井的水文单元的外生气象特征,是该模型最重要的特征。虽然还测试了其他预报视角,但 3 个月的前瞻窗口在精度和准确度之间取得了最佳平衡,较小的预报视角导致较小的 RMSE 但较大的 MSPE 分数,反之亦然。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Forecasting groundwater levels using machine learning methods: The case of California’s Central Valley

Groundwater, the second largest stock of freshwater on the planet, is an important water source used for municipal water supply, irrigation, or industrial needs. For instance, California’s arid Central Valley relies on groundwater resources to produce a quarter of the United States’ food demand as farmers rely on this precious resource when surface water is scarce. Despite its importance, the nexus between groundwater dynamics and climate drivers remains difficult to quantify, model, and predict because of the lack of a comprehensive observation network. In this study, machine learning techniques were used to predict groundwater levels with a 3-month forecasting horizon for the Sacramento River Basin. For this, publicly available meteorological and hydrological datasets and in-situ well-level measurements were used. Time series, ensemble-based, and deep-learning models including transformers were all tested, with an ensemble-based, XGBoost model, producing the best mean standard deviation percent error (MSPE) of 32.23% and a root mean squared error (RMSE) of 1.05 m (m) when using a 3- month forecasting horizon and when tested using a monthly rolling window over the years 2017–2020. The model proved to be better at predicting into wet months than the dry summer months and was found to be better at extracting seasonality than explaining well-level residuals, with well-specific features, as opposed to exogenous meteorological features specific to the hydrological unit of the well, ranking as the most important features to the model. Though other forecasting horizons were tested, a 3-month look-ahead window resulted in the best balance of precision and accuracy, where smaller forecasting horizons resulted in smaller RMSE but larger MSPE scores and vice-versa for larger forecasting horizons.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Hydrology X
Journal of Hydrology X Environmental Science-Water Science and Technology
CiteScore
7.00
自引率
2.50%
发文量
20
审稿时长
25 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信