首页> 外文期刊>Journal of hydrologic engineering >Closure to 'Runoff Estimation by Machine Learning Methods and Application to the Euphrates Basin in Turkey' by Abdullah Gokhan Yilmaz and Nitin Muttil
【24h】

Closure to 'Runoff Estimation by Machine Learning Methods and Application to the Euphrates Basin in Turkey' by Abdullah Gokhan Yilmaz and Nitin Muttil

机译:Abdullah Gokhan Yilmaz和Nitin Muttil结束了“通过机器学习方法估算径流并将其应用于土耳其幼发拉底河盆地”

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

The authors wish to thank the discusser for clarifying various issues regarding the work in Yilmaz and Muttil (2014), and they believe that this discussion will contribute to a better understanding of the study. Their responses to the comments of the discusser are as follows: 1. The authors agree with the discusser that machine learning (ML) methods and multiple linear regression (MLR) gave very similar results as mentioned in the article. This was expected because the relationship between flows from the upstream and downstream stations were linear or near-linear, as pointed out by the discusser. This study was undertaken to demonstrate the applicability of ML methods for flow estimation and also for infilling missing data in the records of selected stations in upper Euphrates Basin (UEB) and middle Euphrates Basin, (MEB). It should be highlighted that the capability of the models to simulate peak flows was also investigated to select models to infill the missing data because peak flow values are extremely important for water-engineering design and for flood mitigation measures. Moreover, peak flow magnitude and timing are very important in snow driven basins, because they are a significant indicator of climate change (Yilmaz and Imteaz 2011). Although ML and MLR models gave similar results for flow simulation, ML models outperformed MLR models for peak flow simulation as explained in the "Construction of Missing Data" section on page 1,023 of the article. Therefore, the authors selected ML models [i.e., Adaptive Neuro-Fuzzy Inference System Model 3 (AM3) and Genetic Programming Model 3 (GP3) for Station 2119, and Feedforward Neural Network Model 3 (M3) and AM3 for Station 2174] to infill the missing data. The authors agree with the discusser's comment, but they also believe that the demonstration of the applicability of ML methods for flow estimation and especially for peak flow simulation was an important contribution.
机译:作者希望感谢讨论者阐明了有关Yilmaz和Muttil(2014)中工作的各种问题,他们相信这次讨论将有助于更好地理解这项研究。他们对讨论者评论的回应如下:1.作者同意讨论者的观点,即机器学习(ML)方法和多元线性回归(MLR)得出的结果与本文中提到的非常相似。这是预料之中的,因为讨论者指出,上游和下游站之间的流量关系是线性的或接近线性的。进行这项研究是为了证明ML方法在流量估算中的适用性以及在上游幼发拉底河盆地(UEB)和中幼发拉底河盆地(MEB)选定站点的记录中填充缺失数据的适用性。应该强调的是,还应研究模型的模拟峰值流量的能力,以选择模型来填充缺失的数据,因为峰值流量值对于水工程设计和防洪措施极为重要。此外,峰值流量的大小和时间在积雪盆地中非常重要,因为它们是气候变化的重要指标(Yilmaz和Imteaz 2011)。尽管ML和MLR模型在流量模拟方面给出了相似的结果,但ML模型在峰值流量模拟方面的表现优于MLR模型,如本文第1,023页的“丢失数据的构造”部分所述。因此,作者选择了ML模型[即用于2119站的自适应神经模糊推理系统模型3(AM3)和遗传编程模型3(GP3),以及用于2174站的前馈神经网络模型3(M3)和AM3]进行填充丢失的数据。作者同意讨论者的意见,但他们也认为,证明ML方法在流量估算中的适用性,特别是在峰值流量模拟中的适用性,是一个重要的贡献。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Journal of hydrologic engineering》 |2015年第7期|07014017.1-07014017.2|共2页
  • 作者单位

    College of Engineering and Science, Victoria Univ., P.O. Box 14428, Melbourne, VIC 8001, Australia;

    College of Engineering and Science, Victoria Univ., P.O. Box 14428, Melbourne, VIC 8001, Australia;

  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 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