Research on Rain Pattern Classification Based on Machine Learning: A Case Study in Pi River Basin

被引:3
|
作者
Fu, Xiaodi [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Kan, Guangyuan [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Liu, Ronghua [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Liang, Ke [4 ]
He, Xiaoyan [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Ding, Liuqian [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] State Key Lab Simulat & Regulat Water Cycle River, Beijing 100038, Peoples R China
[2] China Inst Water Resources & Hydropower Res, Beijing 100038, Peoples R China
[3] Minist Water Resources, Res Ctr Flood & Drought Disaster Reduct, Beijing 100038, Peoples R China
[4] Beijing IWHR Corp, Beijing 100048, Peoples R China
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
rain patterns; distribution over time characteristics; dynamic time planning; LightGBM; LSTM; Decision Tree; SVM;
D O I
10.3390/w15081570
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
For the purpose of improving the scientific nature, reliability, and accuracy of flood forecasting, it is an effective and practical way to construct a flood forecasting scheme and carry out real-time forecasting with consideration of different rain patterns. The technique for rain pattern classification is of great significance in the above-mentioned technical roadmap. With the rapid development of artificial intelligence technologies such as machine learning, it is possible and necessary to apply these new methods to assist rain classification applications. In this research, multiple machine learning methods were adopted to study the time-history distribution characteristics and conduct rain pattern classification from observed rainfall time series data. Firstly, the hourly rainfall data between 2003 and 2021 of 37 rain gauge stations in the Pi River Basin were collected to classify rain patterns based on the universally acknowledged dynamic time warping (DTW) algorithm, and the classifications were treated as the benchmark result. After that, four other machine learning methods, including the Decision Tree (DT), Long- and Short-Term Memory (LSTM) neural network, Light Gradient Boosting Machine (LightGBM), and Support Vector Machine (SVM), were specifically selected to establish classification models and the model performances were compared. By adjusting the sampling size, the influence of different sizes on the classification was analyzed. Intercomparison results indicated that LightGBM achieved the highest accuracy and the fastest training speed, the accuracy and F-1 score were 98.95% and 98.58%, respectively, and the loss function and accuracy converged quickly after only 20 iterations. LSTM and SVM have satisfactory accuracy but relatively low training efficiency, and DT has fast classification speed but relatively low accuracy. With the increase in the sampling size, classification results became stable and more accurate. Besides the higher accuracy, the training efficiency of the four methods was also improved.
引用
收藏
页数:25
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Extending the Minimal Learning Machine for Pattern Classification
    Souza Junior, Amauri H.
    Corona, Francesco
    Miche, Yoan
    Lendasse, Amaury
    Barreto, Guilherme A.
    [J]. 2013 1ST BRICS COUNTRIES CONGRESS ON COMPUTATIONAL INTELLIGENCE AND 11TH BRAZILIAN CONGRESS ON COMPUTATIONAL INTELLIGENCE (BRICS-CCI & CBIC), 2013, : 236 - 241
  • [22] Research on Image Classification and Recognition Technology Based on Machine Learning
    Wang, Yan
    [J]. Applied Mathematics and Nonlinear Sciences, 2024, 9 (01)
  • [23] Interpretation and Spatiotemporal Analysis of Terraces in the Yellow River Basin Based on Machine Learning
    Li, Zishuo
    Tian, Jia
    Ya, Qian
    Feng, Xuejuan
    Wang, Yingxuan
    Ren, Yi
    Wu, Guowei
    [J]. SUSTAINABILITY, 2023, 15 (21)
  • [24] An integration of geospatial and machine learning techniques for mapping groundwater potential: a case study of the Shipra river basin, India
    Patidar R.
    Pingale S.M.
    Khare D.
    [J]. Arabian Journal of Geosciences, 2021, 14 (16)
  • [25] Machine learning and fractal theory models for landslide susceptibility mapping: Case study from the Jinsha River Basin
    Hu, Qiao
    Zhou, Yi
    Wang, Shixing
    Wang, Futao
    [J]. GEOMORPHOLOGY, 2020, 351
  • [26] Coupling machine learning and weather forecast to predict farmland flood disaster: A case study in Yangtze River basin
    Jiang, Zewei
    Yang, Shihong
    Liu, Zhenyang
    Xu, Yi
    Xiong, Yujiang
    Qi, Suting
    Pang, Qingqing
    Xu, Junzeng
    Liu, Fangping
    Xu, Tao
    [J]. ENVIRONMENTAL MODELLING & SOFTWARE, 2022, 155
  • [27] Chemofacies characterization of lacustrine shale based on machine learning classification: A case study from the Dongying depression, Bohai bay basin, China
    Li, Guiang
    Lin, Chengyan
    Ma, Pengjie
    Dong, Chunmei
    Wu, Yuqi
    Guan, Qianqian
    Liu, Weibin
    Du, Xinyu
    Zhao, Ziru
    Yang, Yiming
    [J]. GEOENERGY SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING, 2024, 241
  • [28] Stratiform and Convective Rain Classification Using Machine Learning Models and Micro Rain Radar
    Ghada, Wael
    Casellas, Enric
    Herbinger, Julia
    Garcia-Benadi, Albert
    Bothmann, Ludwig
    Estrella, Nicole
    Bech, Joan
    Menzel, Annette
    [J]. REMOTE SENSING, 2022, 14 (18)
  • [29] Machine learning strategies for lithostratigraphic classification based on geochemical sampling data: A case study in area of Chahanwusu River, Qinghai Province, China
    Zhang, Bao-yi
    Li, Man-yi
    Li, Wei-xia
    Jiang, Zheng-wen
    Khan, Umair
    Wang, Li-fang
    Wang, Fan-yun
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CENTRAL SOUTH UNIVERSITY, 2021, 28 (05) : 1422 - 1447
  • [30] Handling data imbalance in machine learning based landslide susceptibility mapping: a case study of Mandakini River Basin, North-Western Himalayas
    Gupta, Sharad Kumar
    Shukla, Dericks P.
    [J]. LANDSLIDES, 2023, 20 (05) : 933 - 949