Controls on event runoff coefficients and recession coefficients for different runoff generation mechanisms identified by three regression methods
Author:
Chen Xiaofei1, Parajka Juraj12, Széles Borbála1, Strauss Peter3, Blöschl Günter12
Affiliation:
1. TU Wien , Centre for Water Resource Systems , Karlsplatz 13, A-1040, Vienna , Austria . www.waterresources.at 2. TU Wien , Institute of Hydraulic Engineering and Water Resources Management , Karlsplatz 13, A-1040 Vienna , Austria . 3. Federal Agency for Water Management, Institute for Land and Water Management Research , A-3252 Petzenkirchen , Austria .
Abstract
Abstract
The event runoff coefficient (Rc) and the recession coefficient (tc) are of theoretical importance for understanding catchment response and of practical importance in hydrological design. We analyse 57 event periods in the period 2013 to 2015 in the 66 ha Austrian Hydrological Open Air Laboratory (HOAL), where the seven subcatchments are stratified by runoff generation types into wetlands, tile drainage and natural drainage. Three machine learning algorithms (Random forest (RF), Gradient Boost Decision Tree (GBDT) and Support vector machine (SVM)) are used to estimate Rc and tc from 22 event based explanatory variables representing precipitation, soil moisture, groundwater level and season. The model performance of the SVM algorithm in estimating Rc and tc is generally higher than that of the other two methods, measured by the coefficient of determination R2
, and the performance for Rc is higher than that for tc. The relative importance of the explanatory variables for the predictions, assessed by a heatmap, suggests that Rc of the tile drainage systems is more strongly controlled by the weather conditions than by the catchment state, while the opposite is true for natural drainage systems. Overall, model performance strongly depends on the runoff generation type.
Publisher
Walter de Gruyter GmbH
Subject
Fluid Flow and Transfer Processes,Mechanical Engineering,Water Science and Technology
Reference57 articles.
1. Asefa, T., Kemblowski, M., McKee, M., Khalil, A., 2006. Multi-time scale stream flow predictions: the support vector machines approach. Journal of Hydrology, 318, 1–4, 7–16. 2. Basak, D., Pal, S., Patranabis, D.C., 2007. Support vector regression. Neural Information Processing-Letters and Reviews, 11, 10, 203–224. 3. Baudron, P., Alonso-Sarría, F., García-Aróstegui, J.L., Canovas-Garcia, F., Martinez-Vicente, D., Moreno-Brotons, J., 2013. Identifying the origin of groundwater samples in a multi-layer aquifer system with Random Forest classification. Journal of Hydrology, 499, 303–315. 4. Ben-Hur, A., Weston, J., 2010. A user’s guide to support vector machines. In: Carugo, O., Eisenhaber, F. (Eds.): Data Mining Techniques for the Life Sciences. Methods in Molecular Biology (Methods and Protocols), Vol 609. Humana Press, 2010, pp. 223–239. 5. Biswal, B., Kumar, D.N., 2014. What mainly controls recession flows in river basins? Advances in water resources, 65, 25–33.
Cited by
13 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|