IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v10y2022i16p2971-d890533.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Covariance Matrix Adaptation Evolution Strategy for Improving Machine Learning Approaches in Streamflow Prediction

Author

Listed:
  • Rana Muhammad Adnan Ikram

    (School of Economics and Statistics, Guangzhou University, Guangzhou 510006, China)

  • Leonardo Goliatt

    (Computational Modeling, Federal University of Juiz de Fora, Juiz de Fora 36036-900, Brazil)

  • Ozgur Kisi

    (Civil Engineering Department, Ilia State University, 0162 Tbilisi, Georgia)

  • Slavisa Trajkovic

    (Faculty of Civil Engineering and Architecture, University of Niš, Aleksandra Medvedeva 14, 18000 Niš, Serbia)

  • Shamsuddin Shahid

    (School of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University Teknologi Malaysia (UTM), Johor Bahru 81310, Malaysia)

Abstract

Precise streamflow estimation plays a key role in optimal water resource use, reservoirs operations, and designing and planning future hydropower projects. Machine learning models were successfully utilized to estimate streamflow in recent years In this study, a new approach, covariance matrix adaptation evolution strategy (CMAES), was utilized to improve the accuracy of seven machine learning models, namely extreme learning machine (ELM), elastic net (EN), Gaussian processes regression (GPR), support vector regression (SVR), least square SVR (LSSVR), extreme gradient boosting (XGB), and radial basis function neural network (RBFNN), in predicting streamflow. The CMAES was used for proper tuning of control parameters of these selected machine learning models. Seven input combinations were decided to estimate streamflow based on previous lagged temperature and streamflow data values. For numerical prediction accuracy comparison of these machine learning models, six statistical indexes are used, i.e., relative root mean squared error (RRMSE), mean absolute error (MAE), mean absolute percentage error (MAPE), Nash–Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE), and the Kling–Gupta efficiency agreement index (KGE). In contrast, this study uses scatter plots, radar charts, and Taylor diagrams for graphically predicted accuracy comparison. Results show that SVR provided more accurate results than the other methods, especially for the temperature input cases. In contrast, in some streamflow input cases, the LSSVR and GPR were better than the SVR. The SVR tuned by CMAES with temperature and streamflow inputs produced the least RRMSE (0.266), MAE (263.44), and MAPE (12.44) in streamflow estimation. The EN method was found to be the worst model in streamflow prediction. Uncertainty analysis also endorsed the superiority of the SVR over other machine learning methods by having low uncertainty values. Overall, the SVR model based on either temperature or streamflow as inputs, tuned by CMAES, is highly recommended for streamflow estimation.

Suggested Citation

  • Rana Muhammad Adnan Ikram & Leonardo Goliatt & Ozgur Kisi & Slavisa Trajkovic & Shamsuddin Shahid, 2022. "Covariance Matrix Adaptation Evolution Strategy for Improving Machine Learning Approaches in Streamflow Prediction," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(16), pages 1-30, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:10:y:2022:i:16:p:2971-:d:890533
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/10/16/2971/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/10/16/2971/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. A. Bhadra & A. Bandyopadhyay & R. Singh & N. Raghuwanshi, 2010. "Rainfall-Runoff Modeling: Comparison of Two Approaches with Different Data Requirements," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 24(1), pages 37-62, January.
    2. Yan Jiang & Xin Bao & Shaonan Hao & Hongtao Zhao & Xuyong Li & Xianing Wu, 2020. "Monthly Streamflow Forecasting Using ELM-IPSO Based on Phase Space Reconstruction," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 34(11), pages 3515-3531, September.
    3. Kisi, Özgür, 2008. "Constructing neural network sediment estimation models using a data-driven algorithm," Mathematics and Computers in Simulation (MATCOM), Elsevier, vol. 79(1), pages 94-103.
    4. Zaher Mundher Yaseen & Ozgur Kisi & Vahdettin Demir, 2016. "Enhancing Long-Term Streamflow Forecasting and Predicting using Periodicity Data Component: Application of Artificial Intelligence," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 30(12), pages 4125-4151, September.
    5. Ozgur Kisi, 2015. "Streamflow Forecasting and Estimation Using Least Square Support Vector Regression and Adaptive Neuro-Fuzzy Embedded Fuzzy c-means Clustering," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 29(14), pages 5109-5127, November.
    6. Peiman Parisouj & Hamid Mohebzadeh & Taesam Lee, 2020. "Employing Machine Learning Algorithms for Streamflow Prediction: A Case Study of Four River Basins with Different Climatic Zones in the United States," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 34(13), pages 4113-4131, October.
    7. Hui Zou & Trevor Hastie, 2005. "Addendum: Regularization and variable selection via the elastic net," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 67(5), pages 768-768, November.
    8. Hui Zou & Trevor Hastie, 2005. "Regularization and variable selection via the elastic net," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 67(2), pages 301-320, April.
    9. Fereshteh Modaresi & Shahab Araghinejad & Kumars Ebrahimi, 2018. "A Comparative Assessment of Artificial Neural Network, Generalized Regression Neural Network, Least-Square Support Vector Regression, and K-Nearest Neighbor Regression for Monthly Streamflow Forecasti," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 32(1), pages 243-258, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Rana Muhammad Adnan Ikram & Xinyi Cao & Kulwinder Singh Parmar & Ozgur Kisi & Shamsuddin Shahid & Mohammad Zounemat-Kermani, 2023. "Modeling Significant Wave Heights for Multiple Time Horizons Using Metaheuristic Regression Methods," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-24, July.
    2. Tales H. A. Boratto & Camila M. Saporetti & Samuel C. A. Basilio & Alexandre A. Cury & Leonardo Goliatt, 2024. "Data-driven cymbal bronze alloy identification via evolutionary machine learning with automatic feature selection," Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 257-273, January.
    3. Manlin Chen & Zhijie Zhou & Xiaoxia Han & Zhichao Feng, 2023. "A Text-Oriented Fault Diagnosis Method for Electromechanical Device Based on Belief Rule Base," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-25, April.
    4. Xianan Wang & Shahab Hosseini & Danial Jahed Armaghani & Edy Tonnizam Mohamad, 2023. "Data-Driven Optimized Artificial Neural Network Technique for Prediction of Flyrock Induced by Boulder Blasting," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-22, May.
    5. Xiangning Dong & Xuhao Zhu & Minghua Hu & Jie Bao, 2023. "A Methodology for Predicting Ground Delay Program Incidence through Machine Learning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-19, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wenxin Xu & Jie Chen & Xunchang J. Zhang, 2022. "Scale Effects of the Monthly Streamflow Prediction Using a State-of-the-art Deep Learning Model," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 36(10), pages 3609-3625, August.
    2. Tutz, Gerhard & Pößnecker, Wolfgang & Uhlmann, Lorenz, 2015. "Variable selection in general multinomial logit models," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 207-222.
    3. Oxana Babecka Kucharcukova & Jan Bruha, 2016. "Nowcasting the Czech Trade Balance," Working Papers 2016/11, Czech National Bank.
    4. Carstensen, Kai & Heinrich, Markus & Reif, Magnus & Wolters, Maik H., 2020. "Predicting ordinary and severe recessions with a three-state Markov-switching dynamic factor model," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 829-850.
    5. Hou-Tai Chang & Ping-Huai Wang & Wei-Fang Chen & Chen-Ju Lin, 2022. "Risk Assessment of Early Lung Cancer with LDCT and Health Examinations," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(8), pages 1-12, April.
    6. Margherita Giuzio, 2017. "Genetic algorithm versus classical methods in sparse index tracking," Decisions in Economics and Finance, Springer;Associazione per la Matematica, vol. 40(1), pages 243-256, November.
    7. Nicolaj N. Mühlbach, 2020. "Tree-based Synthetic Control Methods: Consequences of moving the US Embassy," CREATES Research Papers 2020-04, Department of Economics and Business Economics, Aarhus University.
    8. Wang, Qiao & Zhou, Wei & Cheng, Yonggang & Ma, Gang & Chang, Xiaolin & Miao, Yu & Chen, E, 2018. "Regularized moving least-square method and regularized improved interpolating moving least-square method with nonsingular moment matrices," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 325(C), pages 120-145.
    9. Dmitriy Drusvyatskiy & Adrian S. Lewis, 2018. "Error Bounds, Quadratic Growth, and Linear Convergence of Proximal Methods," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 43(3), pages 919-948, August.
    10. Mkhadri, Abdallah & Ouhourane, Mohamed, 2013. "An extended variable inclusion and shrinkage algorithm for correlated variables," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 631-644.
    11. Lucian Belascu & Alexandra Horobet & Georgiana Vrinceanu & Consuela Popescu, 2021. "Performance Dissimilarities in European Union Manufacturing: The Effect of Ownership and Technological Intensity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-19, September.
    12. Candelon, B. & Hurlin, C. & Tokpavi, S., 2012. "Sampling error and double shrinkage estimation of minimum variance portfolios," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 511-527.
    13. Susan Athey & Guido W. Imbens & Stefan Wager, 2018. "Approximate residual balancing: debiased inference of average treatment effects in high dimensions," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 80(4), pages 597-623, September.
    14. Andrea Carriero & Todd E. Clark & Massimiliano Marcellino, 2022. "Specification Choices in Quantile Regression for Empirical Macroeconomics," Working Papers 22-25, Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland.
    15. Kim, Hyun Hak & Swanson, Norman R., 2018. "Mining big data using parsimonious factor, machine learning, variable selection and shrinkage methods," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 339-354.
    16. Shuichi Kawano, 2014. "Selection of tuning parameters in bridge regression models via Bayesian information criterion," Statistical Papers, Springer, vol. 55(4), pages 1207-1223, November.
    17. Yize Zhao & Matthias Chung & Brent A. Johnson & Carlos S. Moreno & Qi Long, 2016. "Hierarchical Feature Selection Incorporating Known and Novel Biological Information: Identifying Genomic Features Related to Prostate Cancer Recurrence," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 111(516), pages 1427-1439, October.
    18. Chuliá, Helena & Garrón, Ignacio & Uribe, Jorge M., 2024. "Daily growth at risk: Financial or real drivers? The answer is not always the same," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 762-776.
    19. Enrico Bergamini & Georg Zachmann, 2020. "Exploring EU’s Regional Potential in Low-Carbon Technologies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-28, December.
    20. Jie Jian & Peijun Sang & Mu Zhu, 2024. "Two Gaussian Regularization Methods for Time-Varying Networks," Journal of Agricultural, Biological and Environmental Statistics, Springer;The International Biometric Society;American Statistical Association, vol. 29(4), pages 853-873, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:10:y:2022:i:16:p:2971-:d:890533. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.