首页> 外文期刊>Hydrological sciences journal >Feed-forward vs recurrent neural network models for non-stationarity modelling using data assimilation and adaptivity
【24h】

Feed-forward vs recurrent neural network models for non-stationarity modelling using data assimilation and adaptivity

机译:使用数据同化和适应性进行非平稳性建模的前馈与递归神经网络模型

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Artificial neural networks (ANN) are nonlinear models widely investigated in hydrology due to their properties of universal approximation and parsimony. Their performance during the training phase is very good, and their ability to generalize can be improved by using regularization methods such as early stopping and cross-validation. In our research, two kinds of generic models are implemented: the feed-forward model and the recurrent model. At first glance, the feed-forward model would seem to be more effective than the recurrent one on non-stationary datasets, because measured information on the state of the system (measured discharge) is used as input, thereby implementing a kind of data assimilation. This study investigates the feasibility and effectiveness of data assimilation and adaptivity when implemented in both feed-forward and recurrent neural networks. Based on the IAHS Workshop held in Goteborg, Sweden (July 2013), the hydrological behaviour of two watersheds of different sizes and different kind of non-stationarity will be modelled: (a) the Fernow watershed (0.2km(2)) in the USA, affected by significant modifications in land cover during the study period, and (b) the Durance watershed (2170km(2)) in France, affected by an increase in temperature that is causing a decrease in the extent of glaciers. Two methods were applied to evaluate the ability of ANN to adapt on the test set: (i) adaptivity using observed data to adapt parameter values in real time; and (ii) data assimilation using observed data to modify inaccurate inputs in real time. The goal of the study is thus re-analysis and not forecasting. This study highlights how effective the feed-forward model is compared to the recurrent model for dealing with non-stationarity. It also shows that adaptivity and data assimilation improve the recurrent model considerably, whereas improvement is marginal for the feed-forward model in the same conditions. Finally, this study suggests that adaptivity is effective in the case of changing conditions of the watershed, whereas data assimilation is better in the case of climate change (inputs modification).
机译:人工神经网络(ANN)由于具有通用逼近和简约性,是在水文学中广泛研究的非线性模型。它们在训练阶段的表现非常好,并且可以通过使用诸如早期停止和交叉验证之类的正则化方法来提高其概括能力。在我们的研究中,实现了两种通用模型:前馈模型和递归模型。乍一看,前馈模型似乎比非平稳数据集上的递归模型更有效,因为使用了有关系统状态的测量信息(测量的排放量)作为输入,从而实现了一种数据同化。这项研究调查了在前馈和循环神经网络中实施数据同化和适应性的可行性和有效性。根据在瑞典哥德堡(2013年7月)举行的IAHS研讨会,将对两个大小不同且非平稳性不同的流域的水文行为进行建模:(a)费诺流域(0.2km(2))在研究期间,美国受到土地覆盖率重大变化的影响;(b)在法国的杜兰斯分水岭(2170km(2)),受到温度升高的影响,冰川的面积减少了。应用了两种方法来评估ANN在测试集上的适应能力:(i)使用观测数据实时适应参数值的适应性; (ii)使用观测数据进行数据同化以实时修改不准确的输入。因此,研究的目的是重新分析而不是预测。这项研究强调了前馈模型与递归模型相比在处理非平稳性方面的有效性。它也表明适应性和数据同化显着改善了递归模型,而在相同条件下,前馈模型的改进是微不足道的。最后,这项研究表明,在流域条件变化的情况下,适应性是有效的,而在气候变化的情况下(输入修改),数据同化效果更好。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号