Evaluating GMDH-based models to predict daily dew point temperature (case study of Kerman province)

  • Kourosh QaderiEmail author
  • Bahram Bakhtiari
  • Mohamad Reza Madadi
  • Zahra Afzali-Gorouh
Original Paper


Accurate prediction of dew point temperature is very important in decision making in many fields of water resources planning and management, agricultural engineering and climatology. This study investigates the ability of some data-driven models (DDMs) in predicting daily dew point temperature. These models include traditional group method of data handling (GMDH), improved GMDH models (GMDH1, GMDH2), and two hybrid GMDH-based models (GMDH-HS and GMDH-SCE) which were developed by combination of GMDH with two optimization algorithms, harmony search (HS) and shuffled complex evolution (SCE). 11 years of daily recorded weather variables at Kerman synoptic station including mean temperature (Ta), sunshine hours (S), soil temperature (Ts), mean relative humidity (Rh), and wind speed (Ws) were used to evaluate the proficiency of developed models. Sensitivity analysis revealed that Rh is the most influential input variable in predicting dew point temperature. Seven quantitative standard statistical indices including coefficient of efficiency (CE), correlation coefficient (CC), root mean square error (RMSE), mean square relative error (MSRE), mean absolute percentage error (MAPE), relative bias (RB) and threshold statistic (TSx) were employed to examine the performance of applied models. The results indicated the superiority of combinatorial models (GMDH-HS and GMDH-SCE) to the other developed models in predicting the dew point temperature (Tdp). In terms of threshold statistic, GMDH2-HS had the highest values of TSx (the best model) and GMDH2-SCE, GMDH1-HS, GMDH1-SCE, GMDH2 and GMDH1 got the next ranks, respectively. It was observed that GMDH2-HS could predict the Tdp (with CE = 0.979 and RMSE = 0.745) better than the other models (with CE = 0.958 and RMSE = 0.932, in average), indicating its high efficiency.



  1. Agam N, Berliner PR (2006) Dew formation and water vapor absorption in semi-arid environments—a review. J Arid Environ 65:572–590CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Agyei E, Hatfield K (2006) Enhancing gradient-based parameter estimation with an evolutionary approach. J Hydrol 316:266–280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ahmadi MH, Ahmadi MA, Mehrpooya M, Rosen MA (2015) Using GMDH neural networks to model the power and torque of a stirling engine. Sustainability 7:2243–2255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ahmadi MH, Hajizadeh F, Rahimzadeh M, Shafii MB, Chamkha AJ, Lorenzini G, Ghasempour R (2018) Application GMDH artificial neural network for modeling of Al2O3/water and Al2O3/ethylene glycol thermal conductivity. Int J Heat Technol 36(3):773–782CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ahmadi MH, Sadeghzadeh M, Raffiee AH, Chau K (2019) Applying GMDH neural network to estimate the thermal resistance and thermal conductivity of pulsating heat pipes. Eng Appl Comput Fluid Mech 13(1):327–336Google Scholar
  6. Ajami NK, Gupta H, Wagener T, Sorooshian S (2004) Calibration of a semi-distributed hydrologic model for stream flow estimation along a river system. J Hydrol 298(1–4):112–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Al-Shammari ET, Mohammadi K, Keivani A, Hamid SH, Akib S, Shamshirband S, Petkovi D (2016) Prediction of daily dew point temperature using a model combining the support vector machine with firefly algorithm. J Irrig Drain Eng 14(25):04016013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Amirmojahedi M, Mohammadi K, Shamshirband SH, Seyed Danesh A, Mostafaeipour A, Kamsin A (2016) A hybrid computational intelligence method for predicting dew point temperature. Environ Earth Sci 75(5):415. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Atiquzzaman M, Liong SY (2004) Application of shuffled complex evolution to water distribution network rehabilitation. In: Proceedings of 6th international conference of hydroinformatics, June 21–25, Singapore, vol I, pp 882–889CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ayvaz MT (2007) Simultaneous determination of aquifer parameters and zone structures with fuzzy c-means clustering and meta-heuristic harmony search algorithm. Adv Water Resour 30(11):2326–2338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Barakat SA, Altoubat A (2009) Application of evolutionary global optimization techniques in the design of RC water tanks. Eng Struct 31:332–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Barco J, Wong KM, Stenstrom MK (2008) Automatic calibration of the U.S. EPA SWMM model for a large urban catchment. J Hydraul Eng 134(4):466–474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bashiri-Atrabi H, Qaderi K, Rheinheimer DE, Sharifi E (2015) Application of harmony search algorithm to reservoir operation optimization. Water Resour Manag 29(15):5729–5748CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Celeste AB, Suzuki K, Kadota A (2004) Genetic algorithms for real-time operation of multipurpose water resource systems. Hydroinformatic 6(1):19–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Chu W, Gao X, Sorooshian S (2010) Improving the shuffled complex evolution scheme for optimization of complex nonlinear hydrological systems: application to the calibration of the Sacramento soil moisture accounting model. Water Resour Res. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Diab HB, Saade JJ (1999) Weather prediction using fuzzy sets and inference methodology. J Intell Robot Syst 7(3):283–305Google Scholar
  17. Duan QA, Gupta VK, Sorooshian S (1993) Shuffled complex evolution approach for effective and efficient global minimization. J Optim Theory Appl 76(3):501–521CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Duan Q, Sorooshian S, Gupta VK (1994) optimal use of SCE-UA global optimization method for calibrating watershed models. J Hydrol 158:265–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Eckhardt K, Arnold JG (2001) Automatic calibration of a distributed catchment model. J Hydrol 251:103–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Geem ZW (2009) Harmony search optimisation to the pump-included water distribution network design. Civ Eng Environ Syst 26(3):211–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Geem ZW (2006) Optimal cost design of water distribution networks using harmony search. Eng Optim 38:259–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Geem ZW, Kim JH, Loganathan GV (2001) A new heuristic optimization algorithm: harmony search. Simulation 76(2):60–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Haykin S (2009) Neural networks and learning machines, 3rd edn. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
  24. He B, Takase K, Wang Y (2007) Regional groundwater prediction model using automatic parameter calibration SCE method for a coastal plain of Seto Inland Sea. Water Resour Manag 21:947–959CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hubbard KG, Mahmood R, Carlson C (2003) Estimating daily dew point temperature for the northern Great Plains using maximum and minimum temperature. J Agron 95(2):323–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Ivakhnenko AG, Ivakhnenko GA (1995) The review of problems solvable by algorithms of the group method of data handling (GMDH). Pattern Recognit Image Anal C/C Raspoznavaniye Obrazov I Analiz Izobrazhenii 5:527–535Google Scholar
  27. Javdanian H (2019) Evaluation of soil liquefaction potential using energy approach: experimental and statistical investigation. Bull Eng Geol Environ 78(3):1697–1708CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kasaeian A, Ghalamchi M, Ahmadi MH, Ghalamchi M (2017) GMDH algorithm for modeling the outlet temperatures of a solar chimney based on the ambient temperature. Mech Ind 18(2):216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kang T, Lee S (2014) Modification of the SCE-UA to include constraints by embedding an adaptive penalty function and application: application approach. Water Resour Manag 28(8):2145–2159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kim JH, Geem ZW, Kim ES (2001) Parameter estimation of the nonlinear Muskingum model using harmony search. J Am Water Resour Assoc 37(5):1131–1138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kisi O, Kim S, Shiri J (2013) Estimation of dew point temperature using neuro-fuzzy and neural network techniques. Theor Appl Climatol 114(3–4):365–373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lee KS, Geem ZW (2005) A new meta-heuristic algorithm for continuous engineering optimization: harmony search theory and practice. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 194(36):3902–3933CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lemke F, Müller JA (2003) Self-organising data mining. Syst Anal Model Simul 43(2):231–240. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Li L, Chi SC, Lin G (2005) Genetic algorithm incorporated with harmony procedure and its application to searching of non-circular critical slip surface in soil slopes. J Hydraul Eng 36:913–918 (in Chinese) Google Scholar
  35. Lin ZS, Liu J, He XD (1994) The self-organizing methods of long-term forecasting (I) GMDH and GMPSC model. Meteorol Atmos Phys 53(3–4):155–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Loni R, Asli-Ardeh EA, Ghobadian B, Ahmadi MH, Bellos E (2018) GMDH modeling and experimental investigation of thermal performance enhancement of hemispherical cavity receiver using MWCNT/oil nanofluid. Sol Energy 171:790–803CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Madala HR, Ivakhneko AG (1994) Inductive learning algorithm for complex systems evolution. CRC press, Inc, Boca Raton (ISBN: 0-8493-4438-7) Google Scholar
  38. Mahmood R, Hubbard KG (2005) Assessing bias in evapotranspiration and soil moisture estimates due to the use of modeled solar radiation and dew point temperature data. Agric For Meteorol 130(1–2):71–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Manjarres D, Landa-Torres I, Gil-Lopez S, DelSer J, Bilbao MN, Salcedo-Sanz S, Geem ZW (2013) A survey on applications of the harmony search algorithm. Eng Appl Artif Intell 26(8):1818–1831CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Mariani VC, Luvizotto LGJ, Guerra FA, Coelho LS (2013) A hybrid shuffled complex evolution approach based on differential evolution for unconstrained optimization. Appl Math Comput 217:5822–5829Google Scholar
  41. Mohammadi K, Shamshirband S, Motamedi S, Petkovic D, Hashim R, Gocic M (2015) Extreme learning machine based prediction of daily dew point temperature. Comput Electron Agric 117:214–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Muttil N, Liong SY (2004) Superior exploration–exploitation balance in shuffled complex evolution. J Hydral Eng 130(12):1202–1205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Nadig K, Potter W, Hoogenboom G, McClendon R (2013) Comparison of individual and combined ANN models for prediction of air and dew point temperature. Appl Intell 39(2):354–366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Ohtani T, Ichihashi H, Miyoshi T, Nagasaka K (1998) Orthogonal and successive projection methods for the learning of neuro fuzzy GMDH. Inf Sci 110:5–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Onwubolu GC (2008) Design of hybrid differential evolution and group method of data handling networks for modeling and prediction. Inf Sci 178(18):3616–3634CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Pourkiaei SM, Ahmadi MH, Hasheminejad SM (2016) Modeling and experimental verification of a 25W fabricated PEM fuel cell by parametric and GMDH-type neural network. Mech Ind 17(1):105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Rahimi J, Ebrahimpour M, Khalili A (2013) Spatial changes of extended De Martonne climatic zones affected by climate change in Iran. Theor Appl Climatol 112(3–4):409–418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Rezaei MH, Sadeghzadeh M, Alhuyi Nazari M, Ahmadi MH, Astaraei FR (2018) Applying GMDH artificial neural network in modeling CO2 emissions in four nordic countries. Int J Low Carbon Technol 13(3):266–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Riahi-Madvar H, Ayyoubzadeh SA, Khadangi E, Ebadzadeh MM (2009) An expert system for predicting longitudinal dispersion coefficient in natural streams by using ANFIS. Expert Syst Appl 36(4):8589–8596CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Robinson PJ (2000) Temporal trends in United States dew point temperatures. Int J Climatol 20(9):985–1002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Samsudin R, Saad P, Shabri A (2011) River flow time series using least squares support vector machines. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 15:1835–1852CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Seifi A, Riahi H (2018) Estimating daily reference evapotranspiration using hybrid gamma test-least square support vector machine, gamma test-ANN, and gamma test-ANFIS models in an arid area of Iran. J Water Clim Change. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Shahr-Babak MM, Khanjani MJ, Qaderi K (2016) Uplift capacity prediction of suction caisson in clay using a hybrid intelligence method (GMDH-HS). Appl Ocean Res 59:408–416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Shank DB (2006) Dew point temperature prediction using artificial neural networks. MS thesis, Harding University, SearcyGoogle Scholar
  55. Shank DB, McClendona RW, Paz J, Hoogenbooma G (2008) Ensemble artificial neural network for prediction of dew point. Appl Artif Intell 22(6):523–554CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Shiri J, Kim S, Kisi O (2014) Estimation of daily dew point temperature using genetic programming and neural networks approaches. Hydrol Res 45(2):165–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Sivakumar B, Jayawardena AW, Fernando TMKG (2002) River flow forecasting: use of phase space reconstruction and artificial neural network approaches. J Hydrol 265:225–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Solomatine DP, Ostfeld A (2008) Data-driven modelling: some past experiences and new approaches. J Hydroinformatic 10(1):3–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Sorooshian S, Duan Q, Gupta VK (1993) Calibration of rainfall-runoff models: application of global optimization to the Sacramento soil moisture accounting model. Water Resour Res 29(4):1185–1194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Sudheer KP, Gosain AK, Rangan DM, Saheb SM (2002) Modeling evaporation using an artificial neural network algorithm. Hydrol Process 16(16):3189–3202. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Tamura H, Kondo T (1980) Heuristics free group method of data handling algorithm of generating optimal partial polynomials with application to air pollution prediction. Int J Syst Sci 11(9):1095–1111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Tokar AS, Johnson PA (1999) Rainfall runoff modeling using artificial neural networks ASCE. J Hydrol Eng 4(3):232–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Tsai TM, Yen PH (2017) GMDH algorithms applied to turbidity forecasting. Appl Water Sci 7:1151–1160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Voss MS, Feng X (2002) A new methodology for emergent system identification using particle swarm optimization (PSO) and the group method data handling (GMDH). GECCO 2002:1227–1232Google Scholar
  65. Wang WC, Chau KW, Cheng CT, Qiu L (2009) A comparison of performance of several artificial intelligence methods for forecasting monthly discharge time series. J Hydrol 374:294–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Wang X, Gao XZ, Zenger K (2015) An introduction to harmony search optimization method. Springer International Publishing, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Wang W, Gelder PV, Vrijling JK (2005) Improving daily stream flow forecasts by combining ARMA and ANN models. In: International conference on innovation advances and implementation of flood forecasting technology.Google Scholar
  68. Wu J, Zhu X (2006) Using the shuffled complex evolution global optimization method to solve groundwater management models, APWeb 2006 Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 3841. Springer, Berlin. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Yapo P, Gupta VK, Sorooshian S (1996) Automatic calibration of conceptual rainfall-runoff models: sensitivity to calibration data. J Hydrol 181:23–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Zhang H, Liu X, Cai E, Huang G, Ding C (2013) Integration of dynamic rainfall data with environmental factors to forecast debris flow using an improved GMDH model. Comput Geosci 56:23–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Zhou L (2019) Prediction of CO2 adsorption on different activated carbons by hybrid group method of data-handling networks and LSSVM. Energy Sources Part A Recovery Util Environ Effects 41(16):1960–1971CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Zounemat-Kermani M (2012) Hourly predictive Levenberg–Marquardt ANN and multi linear regression models for predicting of dewpoint temperature. Meteorol Atmos Phys 117(3–4):181–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Austria, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Water EngineeringShahid Bahonar University of KermanKermanIran
  2. 2.Department of Water EngineeringUniversity of JiroftJiroftIran
  3. 3.Department of Water EngineeringFerdowsi University of MashhadMashhadIran

Personalised recommendations