Improving hydrologic models for predictions and process understanding using neural ODEs
-
Published:2022-10-11
Issue:19
Volume:26
Page:5085-5102
-
ISSN:1607-7938
-
Container-title:Hydrology and Earth System Sciences
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci.
Author:
Höge MarvinORCID, Scheidegger AndreasORCID, Baity-Jesi MarcoORCID, Albert CarloORCID, Fenicia FabrizioORCID
Abstract
Abstract. Deep learning methods have frequently outperformed conceptual hydrologic models in rainfall-runoff modelling. Attempts of investigating such deep learning models internally are being made, but the traceability of model states and processes and their interrelations to model input and output is not yet fully understood. Direct interpretability of mechanistic processes has always been considered an asset of conceptual models that helps to gain system understanding aside of predictability. We introduce hydrologic neural ordinary differential equation (ODE) models that perform as well as state-of-the-art deep learning methods in stream flow prediction while maintaining the ease of interpretability of conceptual hydrologic models. In neural ODEs, internal processes that are represented in differential equations, are substituted by neural networks. Therefore, neural ODE models enable the fusion of deep learning with mechanistic modelling. We demonstrate the basin-specific predictive performance for 569 catchments of the continental United States. For exemplary basins, we analyse the dynamics of states and processes learned by the model-internal neural networks. Finally, we discuss the potential of neural ODE models in hydrology.
Publisher
Copernicus GmbH
Subject
General Earth and Planetary Sciences,General Engineering,General Environmental Science
Reference70 articles.
1. Abbott, M., Bathurst, J., Cunge, J., O'Connell, P., and Rasmussen, J.:
An introduction to the European Hydrological System – Systeme Hydrologique Europeen, “SHE”, 1: History and philosophy of a physically-based, distributed modelling system, J Hydrol., 87, 45–59, https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1694(86)90114-9, 1986. a 2. Addor, N., Newman, A. J., Mizukami, N., and Clark, M. P.:
The CAMELS data set: catchment attributes and meteorology for large-sample studies, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 5293–5313, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-5293-2017, 2017. a, b 3. Bennett, A. and Nijssen, B.: Deep learned process parameterizations provide better representations of turbulent heat fluxes in hydrologic models, Water Resour. Res., 57, e2020WR029328, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020WR029328, 2021. a, b 4. Bezanson, J., Edelman, A., Karpinski, S., and Shah, V. B.:
Julia: A fresh approach to numerical computing, SIAM Rev., 59, 65–98, 2017. a 5. Chen, R. T., Rubanova, Y., Bettencourt, J., and Duvenaud, D.:
Neural ordinary differential equations, arXiv [preprint], arXiv:1806.07366, 2018. a, b
Cited by
27 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
|
|