Comparison of stochastic and machine learning methods for multi-step ahead forecasting of hydrological processes

G. Papacharalampous, H. Tyralis, and D. Koutsoyiannis, Comparison of stochastic and machine learning methods for multi-step ahead forecasting of hydrological processes, Stochastic Environmental Research & Risk Assessment, doi:10.1007/s00477-018-1638-6, 2019.

[doc_id=1925]

[English]

Research within the field of hydrology often focuses on the statistical problem of comparing stochastic to machine learning (ML) forecasting methods. The performed comparisons are based on case studies, while a study providing large-scale results on the subject is missing. Herein, we compare 11 stochastic and 9 ML methods regarding their multi-step ahead forecasting properties by conducting 12 extensive computational experiments based on simulations. Each of these experiments uses 2000 time series generated by linear stationary stochastic processes. We conduct each simulation experiment twice; the first time using time series of 100 values and the second time using time series of 300 values. Additionally, we conduct a real-world experiment using 405 mean annual river discharge time series of 100 values. We quantify the forecasting performance of the methods using 18 metrics. The results indicate that stochastic and ML methods may produce equally useful forecasts.

Full text is only available to the NTUA network due to copyright restrictions

PDF Additional material:

Remarks:

Supplementary information: https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.7092824.v1

Our works referenced by this work:

1. D. Koutsoyiannis, H. Yao, and A. Georgakakos, Medium-range flow prediction for the Nile: a comparison of stochastic and deterministic methods, Hydrological Sciences Journal, 53 (1), 142–164, doi:10.1623/hysj.53.1.142, 2008.
2. D. Koutsoyiannis, A random walk on water, Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 14, 585–601, doi:10.5194/hess-14-585-2010, 2010.
3. H. Tyralis, and D. Koutsoyiannis, Simultaneous estimation of the parameters of the Hurst-Kolmogorov stochastic process, Stochastic Environmental Research & Risk Assessment, 25 (1), 21–33, 2011.
4. D. Koutsoyiannis, Hurst-Kolmogorov dynamics and uncertainty, Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 47 (3), 481–495, doi:10.1111/j.1752-1688.2011.00543.x, 2011.
5. H. Tyralis, and D. Koutsoyiannis, A Bayesian statistical model for deriving the predictive distribution of hydroclimatic variables, Climate Dynamics, 42 (11-12), 2867–2883, doi:10.1007/s00382-013-1804-y, 2014.
6. D. Koutsoyiannis, and A. Montanari, Negligent killing of scientific concepts: the stationarity case, Hydrological Sciences Journal, 60 (7-8), 1174–1183, doi:10.1080/02626667.2014.959959, 2015.
7. G. Papacharalampous, Theoretical and empirical comparison of stochastic and machine learning methods for hydrological processes forecasting, Postgraduate Thesis, 372 pages, Department of Water Resources and Environmental Engineering – National Technical University of Athens, Athens, October 2016.
8. G. Papacharalampous, H. Tyralis, and D. Koutsoyiannis, Comparison between stochastic and machine learning methods for hydrological multi-step ahead forecasting: All forecasts are wrong!, European Geosciences Union General Assembly 2017, Geophysical Research Abstracts, Vol. 19, Vienna, 19, EGU2017-3068-2, doi:10.13140/RG.2.2.17205.47848, European Geosciences Union, 2017.
9. G. Papacharalampous, H. Tyralis, and D. Koutsoyiannis, Multi-step ahead streamflow forecasting for the operation of hydropower reservoirs, European Geosciences Union General Assembly 2017, Geophysical Research Abstracts, Vol. 19, Vienna, 19, EGU2017-3069, doi:10.13140/RG.2.2.27271.80801, European Geosciences Union, 2017.
10. H. Tyralis, and D. Koutsoyiannis, On the prediction of persistent processes using the output of deterministic models, Hydrological Sciences Journal, 62 (13), 2083–2102, doi:10.1080/02626667.2017.1361535, 2017.
11. G. Papacharalampous, H. Tyralis, and D. Koutsoyiannis, Forecasting of geophysical processes using stochastic and machine learning algorithms, European Water, 59, 161–168, 2017.
12. H. Tyralis, and G. Papacharalampous, Variable selection in time series forecasting using random forests, Algorithms, 10, 114, doi:10.3390/a10040114, 2017.
13. G. Papacharalampous, H. Tyralis, and D. Koutsoyiannis, One-step ahead forecasting of geophysical processes within a purely statistical framework, Geoscience Letters, 5, 12, doi:10.1186/s40562-018-0111-1, 2018.
14. G. Papacharalampous, H. Tyralis, and D. Koutsoyiannis, Predictability of monthly temperature and precipitation using automatic time series forecasting methods, Acta Geophysica, 66 (4), 807–831, doi:10.1007/s11600-018-0120-7, 2018.

Our works that reference this work:

1. G. Papacharalampous, H. Tyralis, A. Langousis, A. W. Jayawardena, B. Sivakumar, N. Mamassis, A. Montanari, and D. Koutsoyiannis, Probabilistic hydrological post-processing at scale: Why and how to apply machine-learning quantile regression algorithms, Water, doi:10.3390/w11102126, 2019.
2. G. Papacharalampous, D. Koutsoyiannis, and A. Montanari, Quantification of predictive uncertainty in hydrological modelling by harnessing the wisdom of the crowd: Methodology development and investigation using toy models, Advances in Water Resources, 136, 103471, doi:10.1016/j.advwatres.2019.103471, 2020.
3. G. Papacharalampous, H. Tyralis, D. Koutsoyiannis, and A. Montanari, Quantification of predictive uncertainty in hydrological modelling by harnessing the wisdom of the crowd: A large-sample experiment at monthly timescale, Advances in Water Resources, 136, 103470, doi:10.1016/j.advwatres.2019.103470, 2020.
4. D. Koutsoyiannis, and A. Montanari, Bluecat: A local uncertainty estimator for deterministic simulations and predictions, Water Resources Research, 58 (1), e2021WR031215, doi:10.1029/2021WR031215, 2022.

Tagged under: Determinism vs. stochasticity, Most recent works, Stochastics