Comparison of Deep Learning Techniques for River Streamflow Forecasting

Recently, deep learning (DL) models, especially those based on long short-term memory (LSTM), have demonstrated their superior ability in resolving sequential data problems. This study investigated the performance of six models that belong to the supervised learning category to evaluate the performa...
Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Autor*in:	Xuan-Hien Le [verfasserIn] Duc-Hai Nguyen [verfasserIn] Sungho Jung [verfasserIn] Minho Yeon [verfasserIn] Giha Lee [verfasserIn]

Format:	E-Artikel
Sprache:	Englisch

Erschienen:	2021

Schlagwörter:	Bidirectional LSTM deep learning gated recurrent unit long short-term memory streamflow forecasting

Übergeordnetes Werk:	In: IEEE Access - IEEE, 2014, 9(2021), Seite 71805-71820
Übergeordnetes Werk:	volume:9 ; year:2021 ; pages:71805-71820

Links:	Link aufrufen Link aufrufen Link aufrufen Journal toc

DOI / URN:	10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3077703

Katalog-ID:	DOAJ062347926

Internformat


LEADER	01000caa a22002652 4500
001	DOAJ062347926
003	DE-627
005	20230309020634.0
007	cr uuu---uuuuu
008	230228s2021 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c
024	7		\|a 10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3077703 \|2 doi
035			\|a (DE-627)DOAJ062347926
035			\|a (DE-599)DOAJ9e85309437e74a9e9ff047694645bcd4
040			\|a DE-627 \|b ger \|c DE-627 \|e rakwb
041			\|a eng
050		0	\|a TK1-9971
100	0		\|a Xuan-Hien Le \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
245	1	0	\|a Comparison of Deep Learning Techniques for River Streamflow Forecasting
264		1	\|c 2021
336			\|a Text \|b txt \|2 rdacontent
337			\|a Computermedien \|b c \|2 rdamedia
338			\|a Online-Ressource \|b cr \|2 rdacarrier
520			\|a Recently, deep learning (DL) models, especially those based on long short-term memory (LSTM), have demonstrated their superior ability in resolving sequential data problems. This study investigated the performance of six models that belong to the supervised learning category to evaluate the performance of DL models in terms of streamflow forecasting. They include a feed-forward neural network (FFNN), a convolutional neural network (CNN), and four LSTM-based models. Two standard models with just one hidden layer—LSTM and gated recurrent unit (GRU)—are used against two more complex models—the stacked LSTM (StackedLSTM) model and the Bidirectional LSTM (BiLSTM) model. The Red River basin—the largest river basin in the north of Vietnam—was adopted as a case study because of its geographic relevance since Hanoi city—the capital of Vietnam—is located downstream of the Red River. Besides, the input data of these models are the observed data at seven hydrological stations on the three main river branches of the Red River system. This study indicates that the four LSTM-based models exhibited considerably better performance and maintained stability than the FFNN and CNN models. However, the complexity of the StackedLSTM and BiLSTM models is not accompanied by performance improvement because the results of the comparison illustrate that their respective performance is not higher than the two standard models—LSTM and GRU. The findings of this study present that LSTM-based models can reach impressive forecasts even in the presence of upstream dams and reservoirs. For the streamflow-forecasting problem, the LSTM and GRU models with a simple architecture (one hidden layer) are sufficient to produce highly reliable forecasts while minimizing the computation time.
650		4	\|a Bidirectional LSTM
650		4	\|a deep learning
650		4	\|a gated recurrent unit
650		4	\|a long short-term memory
650		4	\|a streamflow forecasting
653		0	\|a Electrical engineering. Electronics. Nuclear engineering
700	0		\|a Duc-Hai Nguyen \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Sungho Jung \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Minho Yeon \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Giha Lee \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
773	0	8	\|i In \|t IEEE Access \|d IEEE, 2014 \|g 9(2021), Seite 71805-71820 \|w (DE-627)728440385 \|w (DE-600)2687964-5 \|x 21693536 \|7 nnns
773	1	8	\|g volume:9 \|g year:2021 \|g pages:71805-71820
856	4	0	\|u https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3077703 \|z kostenfrei
856	4	0	\|u https://doaj.org/article/9e85309437e74a9e9ff047694645bcd4 \|z kostenfrei
856	4	0	\|u https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9423961/ \|z kostenfrei
856	4	2	\|u https://doaj.org/toc/2169-3536 \|y Journal toc \|z kostenfrei
912			\|a GBV_USEFLAG_A
912			\|a SYSFLAG_A
912			\|a GBV_DOAJ
912			\|a GBV_ILN_11
912			\|a GBV_ILN_20
912			\|a GBV_ILN_22
912			\|a GBV_ILN_23
912			\|a GBV_ILN_24
912			\|a GBV_ILN_31
912			\|a GBV_ILN_39
912			\|a GBV_ILN_40
912			\|a GBV_ILN_60
912			\|a GBV_ILN_62
912			\|a GBV_ILN_63
912			\|a GBV_ILN_65
912			\|a GBV_ILN_69
912			\|a GBV_ILN_70
912			\|a GBV_ILN_73
912			\|a GBV_ILN_95
912			\|a GBV_ILN_105
912			\|a GBV_ILN_110
912			\|a GBV_ILN_151
912			\|a GBV_ILN_161
912			\|a GBV_ILN_170
912			\|a GBV_ILN_213
912			\|a GBV_ILN_230
912			\|a GBV_ILN_285
912			\|a GBV_ILN_293
912			\|a GBV_ILN_370
912			\|a GBV_ILN_602
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2014
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4012
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4037
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4112
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4125
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4126
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4249
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4305
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4306
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4307
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4313
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4322
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4323
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4324
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4325
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4335
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4338
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4367
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4700
951			\|a AR
952			\|d 9 \|j 2021 \|h 71805-71820

Indexfelder

author_variant	x h l xhl d h n dhn s j sj m y my g l gl
matchkey_str	article:21693536:2021----::oprsnfeperigehiusorvrt
hierarchy_sort_str	2021
callnumber-subject-code	TK
publishDate	2021
allfields	10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3077703 doi (DE-627)DOAJ062347926 (DE-599)DOAJ9e85309437e74a9e9ff047694645bcd4 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng TK1-9971 Xuan-Hien Le verfasserin aut Comparison of Deep Learning Techniques for River Streamflow Forecasting 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Recently, deep learning (DL) models, especially those based on long short-term memory (LSTM), have demonstrated their superior ability in resolving sequential data problems. This study investigated the performance of six models that belong to the supervised learning category to evaluate the performance of DL models in terms of streamflow forecasting. They include a feed-forward neural network (FFNN), a convolutional neural network (CNN), and four LSTM-based models. Two standard models with just one hidden layer—LSTM and gated recurrent unit (GRU)—are used against two more complex models—the stacked LSTM (StackedLSTM) model and the Bidirectional LSTM (BiLSTM) model. The Red River basin—the largest river basin in the north of Vietnam—was adopted as a case study because of its geographic relevance since Hanoi city—the capital of Vietnam—is located downstream of the Red River. Besides, the input data of these models are the observed data at seven hydrological stations on the three main river branches of the Red River system. This study indicates that the four LSTM-based models exhibited considerably better performance and maintained stability than the FFNN and CNN models. However, the complexity of the StackedLSTM and BiLSTM models is not accompanied by performance improvement because the results of the comparison illustrate that their respective performance is not higher than the two standard models—LSTM and GRU. The findings of this study present that LSTM-based models can reach impressive forecasts even in the presence of upstream dams and reservoirs. For the streamflow-forecasting problem, the LSTM and GRU models with a simple architecture (one hidden layer) are sufficient to produce highly reliable forecasts while minimizing the computation time. Bidirectional LSTM deep learning gated recurrent unit long short-term memory streamflow forecasting Electrical engineering. Electronics. Nuclear engineering Duc-Hai Nguyen verfasserin aut Sungho Jung verfasserin aut Minho Yeon verfasserin aut Giha Lee verfasserin aut In IEEE Access IEEE, 2014 9(2021), Seite 71805-71820 (DE-627)728440385 (DE-600)2687964-5 21693536 nnns volume:9 year:2021 pages:71805-71820 https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3077703 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/9e85309437e74a9e9ff047694645bcd4 kostenfrei https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9423961/ kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2169-3536 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 9 2021 71805-71820
spelling	10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3077703 doi (DE-627)DOAJ062347926 (DE-599)DOAJ9e85309437e74a9e9ff047694645bcd4 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng TK1-9971 Xuan-Hien Le verfasserin aut Comparison of Deep Learning Techniques for River Streamflow Forecasting 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Recently, deep learning (DL) models, especially those based on long short-term memory (LSTM), have demonstrated their superior ability in resolving sequential data problems. This study investigated the performance of six models that belong to the supervised learning category to evaluate the performance of DL models in terms of streamflow forecasting. They include a feed-forward neural network (FFNN), a convolutional neural network (CNN), and four LSTM-based models. Two standard models with just one hidden layer—LSTM and gated recurrent unit (GRU)—are used against two more complex models—the stacked LSTM (StackedLSTM) model and the Bidirectional LSTM (BiLSTM) model. The Red River basin—the largest river basin in the north of Vietnam—was adopted as a case study because of its geographic relevance since Hanoi city—the capital of Vietnam—is located downstream of the Red River. Besides, the input data of these models are the observed data at seven hydrological stations on the three main river branches of the Red River system. This study indicates that the four LSTM-based models exhibited considerably better performance and maintained stability than the FFNN and CNN models. However, the complexity of the StackedLSTM and BiLSTM models is not accompanied by performance improvement because the results of the comparison illustrate that their respective performance is not higher than the two standard models—LSTM and GRU. The findings of this study present that LSTM-based models can reach impressive forecasts even in the presence of upstream dams and reservoirs. For the streamflow-forecasting problem, the LSTM and GRU models with a simple architecture (one hidden layer) are sufficient to produce highly reliable forecasts while minimizing the computation time. Bidirectional LSTM deep learning gated recurrent unit long short-term memory streamflow forecasting Electrical engineering. Electronics. Nuclear engineering Duc-Hai Nguyen verfasserin aut Sungho Jung verfasserin aut Minho Yeon verfasserin aut Giha Lee verfasserin aut In IEEE Access IEEE, 2014 9(2021), Seite 71805-71820 (DE-627)728440385 (DE-600)2687964-5 21693536 nnns volume:9 year:2021 pages:71805-71820 https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3077703 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/9e85309437e74a9e9ff047694645bcd4 kostenfrei https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9423961/ kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2169-3536 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 9 2021 71805-71820
allfields_unstemmed	10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3077703 doi (DE-627)DOAJ062347926 (DE-599)DOAJ9e85309437e74a9e9ff047694645bcd4 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng TK1-9971 Xuan-Hien Le verfasserin aut Comparison of Deep Learning Techniques for River Streamflow Forecasting 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Recently, deep learning (DL) models, especially those based on long short-term memory (LSTM), have demonstrated their superior ability in resolving sequential data problems. This study investigated the performance of six models that belong to the supervised learning category to evaluate the performance of DL models in terms of streamflow forecasting. They include a feed-forward neural network (FFNN), a convolutional neural network (CNN), and four LSTM-based models. Two standard models with just one hidden layer—LSTM and gated recurrent unit (GRU)—are used against two more complex models—the stacked LSTM (StackedLSTM) model and the Bidirectional LSTM (BiLSTM) model. The Red River basin—the largest river basin in the north of Vietnam—was adopted as a case study because of its geographic relevance since Hanoi city—the capital of Vietnam—is located downstream of the Red River. Besides, the input data of these models are the observed data at seven hydrological stations on the three main river branches of the Red River system. This study indicates that the four LSTM-based models exhibited considerably better performance and maintained stability than the FFNN and CNN models. However, the complexity of the StackedLSTM and BiLSTM models is not accompanied by performance improvement because the results of the comparison illustrate that their respective performance is not higher than the two standard models—LSTM and GRU. The findings of this study present that LSTM-based models can reach impressive forecasts even in the presence of upstream dams and reservoirs. For the streamflow-forecasting problem, the LSTM and GRU models with a simple architecture (one hidden layer) are sufficient to produce highly reliable forecasts while minimizing the computation time. Bidirectional LSTM deep learning gated recurrent unit long short-term memory streamflow forecasting Electrical engineering. Electronics. Nuclear engineering Duc-Hai Nguyen verfasserin aut Sungho Jung verfasserin aut Minho Yeon verfasserin aut Giha Lee verfasserin aut In IEEE Access IEEE, 2014 9(2021), Seite 71805-71820 (DE-627)728440385 (DE-600)2687964-5 21693536 nnns volume:9 year:2021 pages:71805-71820 https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3077703 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/9e85309437e74a9e9ff047694645bcd4 kostenfrei https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9423961/ kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2169-3536 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 9 2021 71805-71820
allfieldsGer	10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3077703 doi (DE-627)DOAJ062347926 (DE-599)DOAJ9e85309437e74a9e9ff047694645bcd4 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng TK1-9971 Xuan-Hien Le verfasserin aut Comparison of Deep Learning Techniques for River Streamflow Forecasting 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Recently, deep learning (DL) models, especially those based on long short-term memory (LSTM), have demonstrated their superior ability in resolving sequential data problems. This study investigated the performance of six models that belong to the supervised learning category to evaluate the performance of DL models in terms of streamflow forecasting. They include a feed-forward neural network (FFNN), a convolutional neural network (CNN), and four LSTM-based models. Two standard models with just one hidden layer—LSTM and gated recurrent unit (GRU)—are used against two more complex models—the stacked LSTM (StackedLSTM) model and the Bidirectional LSTM (BiLSTM) model. The Red River basin—the largest river basin in the north of Vietnam—was adopted as a case study because of its geographic relevance since Hanoi city—the capital of Vietnam—is located downstream of the Red River. Besides, the input data of these models are the observed data at seven hydrological stations on the three main river branches of the Red River system. This study indicates that the four LSTM-based models exhibited considerably better performance and maintained stability than the FFNN and CNN models. However, the complexity of the StackedLSTM and BiLSTM models is not accompanied by performance improvement because the results of the comparison illustrate that their respective performance is not higher than the two standard models—LSTM and GRU. The findings of this study present that LSTM-based models can reach impressive forecasts even in the presence of upstream dams and reservoirs. For the streamflow-forecasting problem, the LSTM and GRU models with a simple architecture (one hidden layer) are sufficient to produce highly reliable forecasts while minimizing the computation time. Bidirectional LSTM deep learning gated recurrent unit long short-term memory streamflow forecasting Electrical engineering. Electronics. Nuclear engineering Duc-Hai Nguyen verfasserin aut Sungho Jung verfasserin aut Minho Yeon verfasserin aut Giha Lee verfasserin aut In IEEE Access IEEE, 2014 9(2021), Seite 71805-71820 (DE-627)728440385 (DE-600)2687964-5 21693536 nnns volume:9 year:2021 pages:71805-71820 https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3077703 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/9e85309437e74a9e9ff047694645bcd4 kostenfrei https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9423961/ kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2169-3536 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 9 2021 71805-71820
allfieldsSound	10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3077703 doi (DE-627)DOAJ062347926 (DE-599)DOAJ9e85309437e74a9e9ff047694645bcd4 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng TK1-9971 Xuan-Hien Le verfasserin aut Comparison of Deep Learning Techniques for River Streamflow Forecasting 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Recently, deep learning (DL) models, especially those based on long short-term memory (LSTM), have demonstrated their superior ability in resolving sequential data problems. This study investigated the performance of six models that belong to the supervised learning category to evaluate the performance of DL models in terms of streamflow forecasting. They include a feed-forward neural network (FFNN), a convolutional neural network (CNN), and four LSTM-based models. Two standard models with just one hidden layer—LSTM and gated recurrent unit (GRU)—are used against two more complex models—the stacked LSTM (StackedLSTM) model and the Bidirectional LSTM (BiLSTM) model. The Red River basin—the largest river basin in the north of Vietnam—was adopted as a case study because of its geographic relevance since Hanoi city—the capital of Vietnam—is located downstream of the Red River. Besides, the input data of these models are the observed data at seven hydrological stations on the three main river branches of the Red River system. This study indicates that the four LSTM-based models exhibited considerably better performance and maintained stability than the FFNN and CNN models. However, the complexity of the StackedLSTM and BiLSTM models is not accompanied by performance improvement because the results of the comparison illustrate that their respective performance is not higher than the two standard models—LSTM and GRU. The findings of this study present that LSTM-based models can reach impressive forecasts even in the presence of upstream dams and reservoirs. For the streamflow-forecasting problem, the LSTM and GRU models with a simple architecture (one hidden layer) are sufficient to produce highly reliable forecasts while minimizing the computation time. Bidirectional LSTM deep learning gated recurrent unit long short-term memory streamflow forecasting Electrical engineering. Electronics. Nuclear engineering Duc-Hai Nguyen verfasserin aut Sungho Jung verfasserin aut Minho Yeon verfasserin aut Giha Lee verfasserin aut In IEEE Access IEEE, 2014 9(2021), Seite 71805-71820 (DE-627)728440385 (DE-600)2687964-5 21693536 nnns volume:9 year:2021 pages:71805-71820 https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3077703 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/9e85309437e74a9e9ff047694645bcd4 kostenfrei https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9423961/ kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2169-3536 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 9 2021 71805-71820
language	English
source	In IEEE Access 9(2021), Seite 71805-71820 volume:9 year:2021 pages:71805-71820
sourceStr	In IEEE Access 9(2021), Seite 71805-71820 volume:9 year:2021 pages:71805-71820
format_phy_str_mv	Article
institution	findex.gbv.de
topic_facet	Bidirectional LSTM deep learning gated recurrent unit long short-term memory streamflow forecasting Electrical engineering. Electronics. Nuclear engineering
isfreeaccess_bool	true
container_title	IEEE Access
authorswithroles_txt_mv	Xuan-Hien Le @@aut@@ Duc-Hai Nguyen @@aut@@ Sungho Jung @@aut@@ Minho Yeon @@aut@@ Giha Lee @@aut@@
publishDateDaySort_date	2021-01-01T00:00:00Z
hierarchy_top_id	728440385
id	DOAJ062347926
language_de	englisch
fullrecord	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ062347926</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230309020634.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230228s2021 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3077703</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ062347926</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJ9e85309437e74a9e9ff047694645bcd4</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">TK1-9971</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Xuan-Hien Le</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Comparison of Deep Learning Techniques for River Streamflow Forecasting</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Recently, deep learning (DL) models, especially those based on long short-term memory (LSTM), have demonstrated their superior ability in resolving sequential data problems. This study investigated the performance of six models that belong to the supervised learning category to evaluate the performance of DL models in terms of streamflow forecasting. They include a feed-forward neural network (FFNN), a convolutional neural network (CNN), and four LSTM-based models. Two standard models with just one hidden layer—LSTM and gated recurrent unit (GRU)—are used against two more complex models—the stacked LSTM (StackedLSTM) model and the Bidirectional LSTM (BiLSTM) model. The Red River basin—the largest river basin in the north of Vietnam—was adopted as a case study because of its geographic relevance since Hanoi city—the capital of Vietnam—is located downstream of the Red River. Besides, the input data of these models are the observed data at seven hydrological stations on the three main river branches of the Red River system. This study indicates that the four LSTM-based models exhibited considerably better performance and maintained stability than the FFNN and CNN models. However, the complexity of the StackedLSTM and BiLSTM models is not accompanied by performance improvement because the results of the comparison illustrate that their respective performance is not higher than the two standard models—LSTM and GRU. The findings of this study present that LSTM-based models can reach impressive forecasts even in the presence of upstream dams and reservoirs. For the streamflow-forecasting problem, the LSTM and GRU models with a simple architecture (one hidden layer) are sufficient to produce highly reliable forecasts while minimizing the computation time.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Bidirectional LSTM</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">deep learning</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">gated recurrent unit</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">long short-term memory</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">streamflow forecasting</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Electrical engineering. Electronics. Nuclear engineering</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Duc-Hai Nguyen</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Sungho Jung</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Minho Yeon</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Giha Lee</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">IEEE Access</subfield><subfield code="d">IEEE, 2014</subfield><subfield code="g">9(2021), Seite 71805-71820</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)728440385</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2687964-5</subfield><subfield code="x">21693536</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:9</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2021</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:71805-71820</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3077703</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/9e85309437e74a9e9ff047694645bcd4</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9423961/</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/2169-3536</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4335</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">9</subfield><subfield code="j">2021</subfield><subfield code="h">71805-71820</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
callnumber-first	T - Technology
author	Xuan-Hien Le
spellingShingle	Xuan-Hien Le misc TK1-9971 misc Bidirectional LSTM misc deep learning misc gated recurrent unit misc long short-term memory misc streamflow forecasting misc Electrical engineering. Electronics. Nuclear engineering Comparison of Deep Learning Techniques for River Streamflow Forecasting
authorStr	Xuan-Hien Le
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv	@@773@@(DE-627)728440385
format	electronic Article
delete_txt_mv	keep
author_role	aut aut aut aut aut
collection	DOAJ
remote_str	true
callnumber-label	TK1-9971
illustrated	Not Illustrated
issn	21693536
topic_title	TK1-9971 Comparison of Deep Learning Techniques for River Streamflow Forecasting Bidirectional LSTM deep learning gated recurrent unit long short-term memory streamflow forecasting
topic	misc TK1-9971 misc Bidirectional LSTM misc deep learning misc gated recurrent unit misc long short-term memory misc streamflow forecasting misc Electrical engineering. Electronics. Nuclear engineering
topic_unstemmed	misc TK1-9971 misc Bidirectional LSTM misc deep learning misc gated recurrent unit misc long short-term memory misc streamflow forecasting misc Electrical engineering. Electronics. Nuclear engineering
topic_browse	misc TK1-9971 misc Bidirectional LSTM misc deep learning misc gated recurrent unit misc long short-term memory misc streamflow forecasting misc Electrical engineering. Electronics. Nuclear engineering
format_facet	Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource
format_main_str_mv	Text Zeitschrift/Artikel
carriertype_str_mv	cr
hierarchy_parent_title	IEEE Access
hierarchy_parent_id	728440385
hierarchy_top_title	IEEE Access
isfreeaccess_txt	true
familylinks_str_mv	(DE-627)728440385 (DE-600)2687964-5
title	Comparison of Deep Learning Techniques for River Streamflow Forecasting
ctrlnum	(DE-627)DOAJ062347926 (DE-599)DOAJ9e85309437e74a9e9ff047694645bcd4
title_full	Comparison of Deep Learning Techniques for River Streamflow Forecasting
author_sort	Xuan-Hien Le
journal	IEEE Access
journalStr	IEEE Access
callnumber-first-code	T
lang_code	eng
isOA_bool	true
recordtype	marc
publishDateSort	2021
contenttype_str_mv	txt
container_start_page	71805
author_browse	Xuan-Hien Le Duc-Hai Nguyen Sungho Jung Minho Yeon Giha Lee
container_volume	9
class	TK1-9971
format_se	Elektronische Aufsätze
author-letter	Xuan-Hien Le
doi_str_mv	10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3077703
author2-role	verfasserin
title_sort	comparison of deep learning techniques for river streamflow forecasting
callnumber	TK1-9971
title_auth	Comparison of Deep Learning Techniques for River Streamflow Forecasting
abstract	Recently, deep learning (DL) models, especially those based on long short-term memory (LSTM), have demonstrated their superior ability in resolving sequential data problems. This study investigated the performance of six models that belong to the supervised learning category to evaluate the performance of DL models in terms of streamflow forecasting. They include a feed-forward neural network (FFNN), a convolutional neural network (CNN), and four LSTM-based models. Two standard models with just one hidden layer—LSTM and gated recurrent unit (GRU)—are used against two more complex models—the stacked LSTM (StackedLSTM) model and the Bidirectional LSTM (BiLSTM) model. The Red River basin—the largest river basin in the north of Vietnam—was adopted as a case study because of its geographic relevance since Hanoi city—the capital of Vietnam—is located downstream of the Red River. Besides, the input data of these models are the observed data at seven hydrological stations on the three main river branches of the Red River system. This study indicates that the four LSTM-based models exhibited considerably better performance and maintained stability than the FFNN and CNN models. However, the complexity of the StackedLSTM and BiLSTM models is not accompanied by performance improvement because the results of the comparison illustrate that their respective performance is not higher than the two standard models—LSTM and GRU. The findings of this study present that LSTM-based models can reach impressive forecasts even in the presence of upstream dams and reservoirs. For the streamflow-forecasting problem, the LSTM and GRU models with a simple architecture (one hidden layer) are sufficient to produce highly reliable forecasts while minimizing the computation time.
abstractGer	Recently, deep learning (DL) models, especially those based on long short-term memory (LSTM), have demonstrated their superior ability in resolving sequential data problems. This study investigated the performance of six models that belong to the supervised learning category to evaluate the performance of DL models in terms of streamflow forecasting. They include a feed-forward neural network (FFNN), a convolutional neural network (CNN), and four LSTM-based models. Two standard models with just one hidden layer—LSTM and gated recurrent unit (GRU)—are used against two more complex models—the stacked LSTM (StackedLSTM) model and the Bidirectional LSTM (BiLSTM) model. The Red River basin—the largest river basin in the north of Vietnam—was adopted as a case study because of its geographic relevance since Hanoi city—the capital of Vietnam—is located downstream of the Red River. Besides, the input data of these models are the observed data at seven hydrological stations on the three main river branches of the Red River system. This study indicates that the four LSTM-based models exhibited considerably better performance and maintained stability than the FFNN and CNN models. However, the complexity of the StackedLSTM and BiLSTM models is not accompanied by performance improvement because the results of the comparison illustrate that their respective performance is not higher than the two standard models—LSTM and GRU. The findings of this study present that LSTM-based models can reach impressive forecasts even in the presence of upstream dams and reservoirs. For the streamflow-forecasting problem, the LSTM and GRU models with a simple architecture (one hidden layer) are sufficient to produce highly reliable forecasts while minimizing the computation time.
abstract_unstemmed	Recently, deep learning (DL) models, especially those based on long short-term memory (LSTM), have demonstrated their superior ability in resolving sequential data problems. This study investigated the performance of six models that belong to the supervised learning category to evaluate the performance of DL models in terms of streamflow forecasting. They include a feed-forward neural network (FFNN), a convolutional neural network (CNN), and four LSTM-based models. Two standard models with just one hidden layer—LSTM and gated recurrent unit (GRU)—are used against two more complex models—the stacked LSTM (StackedLSTM) model and the Bidirectional LSTM (BiLSTM) model. The Red River basin—the largest river basin in the north of Vietnam—was adopted as a case study because of its geographic relevance since Hanoi city—the capital of Vietnam—is located downstream of the Red River. Besides, the input data of these models are the observed data at seven hydrological stations on the three main river branches of the Red River system. This study indicates that the four LSTM-based models exhibited considerably better performance and maintained stability than the FFNN and CNN models. However, the complexity of the StackedLSTM and BiLSTM models is not accompanied by performance improvement because the results of the comparison illustrate that their respective performance is not higher than the two standard models—LSTM and GRU. The findings of this study present that LSTM-based models can reach impressive forecasts even in the presence of upstream dams and reservoirs. For the streamflow-forecasting problem, the LSTM and GRU models with a simple architecture (one hidden layer) are sufficient to produce highly reliable forecasts while minimizing the computation time.
collection_details	GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700
title_short	Comparison of Deep Learning Techniques for River Streamflow Forecasting
url	https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3077703 https://doaj.org/article/9e85309437e74a9e9ff047694645bcd4 https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9423961/ https://doaj.org/toc/2169-3536
remote_bool	true
author2	Duc-Hai Nguyen Sungho Jung Minho Yeon Giha Lee
author2Str	Duc-Hai Nguyen Sungho Jung Minho Yeon Giha Lee
ppnlink	728440385
callnumber-subject	TK - Electrical and Nuclear Engineering
mediatype_str_mv	c
isOA_txt	true
hochschulschrift_bool	false
doi_str	10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3077703
callnumber-a	TK1-9971
up_date	2024-07-04T01:18:21.903Z
_version_	1803609337394888704
fullrecord_marcxml	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ062347926</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230309020634.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230228s2021 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3077703</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ062347926</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJ9e85309437e74a9e9ff047694645bcd4</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">TK1-9971</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Xuan-Hien Le</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Comparison of Deep Learning Techniques for River Streamflow Forecasting</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Recently, deep learning (DL) models, especially those based on long short-term memory (LSTM), have demonstrated their superior ability in resolving sequential data problems. This study investigated the performance of six models that belong to the supervised learning category to evaluate the performance of DL models in terms of streamflow forecasting. They include a feed-forward neural network (FFNN), a convolutional neural network (CNN), and four LSTM-based models. Two standard models with just one hidden layer—LSTM and gated recurrent unit (GRU)—are used against two more complex models—the stacked LSTM (StackedLSTM) model and the Bidirectional LSTM (BiLSTM) model. The Red River basin—the largest river basin in the north of Vietnam—was adopted as a case study because of its geographic relevance since Hanoi city—the capital of Vietnam—is located downstream of the Red River. Besides, the input data of these models are the observed data at seven hydrological stations on the three main river branches of the Red River system. This study indicates that the four LSTM-based models exhibited considerably better performance and maintained stability than the FFNN and CNN models. However, the complexity of the StackedLSTM and BiLSTM models is not accompanied by performance improvement because the results of the comparison illustrate that their respective performance is not higher than the two standard models—LSTM and GRU. The findings of this study present that LSTM-based models can reach impressive forecasts even in the presence of upstream dams and reservoirs. For the streamflow-forecasting problem, the LSTM and GRU models with a simple architecture (one hidden layer) are sufficient to produce highly reliable forecasts while minimizing the computation time.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Bidirectional LSTM</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">deep learning</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">gated recurrent unit</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">long short-term memory</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">streamflow forecasting</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Electrical engineering. Electronics. Nuclear engineering</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Duc-Hai Nguyen</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Sungho Jung</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Minho Yeon</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Giha Lee</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">IEEE Access</subfield><subfield code="d">IEEE, 2014</subfield><subfield code="g">9(2021), Seite 71805-71820</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)728440385</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2687964-5</subfield><subfield code="x">21693536</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:9</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2021</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:71805-71820</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3077703</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/9e85309437e74a9e9ff047694645bcd4</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9423961/</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/2169-3536</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4335</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">9</subfield><subfield code="j">2021</subfield><subfield code="h">71805-71820</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
score	7.3976336

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Schreiben Sie uns!

Comparison of Deep Learning Techniques for River Streamflow Forecasting

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Zugang & Verfügbarkeit

Vorhandene Bände

Nicht das Richtige dabei?