Advertisement

Computer Aided Numerical Methods for Hydrological Model Calibration: An Overview and Recent Development

  • Guangyuan Kan
  • Xiaoyan He
  • Jiren Li
  • Liuqian Ding
  • Yang Hong
  • Hongbin Zhang
  • Ke Liang
  • Mengjie Zhang
Original Paper

Abstract

In this paper, the computer aided numerical method for hydrological model calibration is reviewed. The content includes review of the watershed hydrological models (data-driven model, conceptual model, and distributed model), review of the model calibration methods (manual calibration, single-objective automatic calibration, multi-objective automatic calibration, objective function, termination criterion, and data utilized for calibration), and review of the parallel computing accelerated model calibration (multi-node computer cluster, multi-core CPU, many-core GPU, and heterogeneous parallel computing). Recent development and the state-of-the-art are also analyzed. Three conclusions can be drawn: (1) Nowadays, different types of hydrological models have their own application fields and perform very well. Distributed hydrological model becomes the development direction and has a good future. (2) Computer aided automatic hydrological model calibration method has become the mainstream. Single-objective optimization method such as SCE-UA and multi-objective optimization method such as NSGA-II are very suitable to the model parameter calibration. (3) Heterogeneous parallel computing technology is the most powerful acceleration method for the hydrological model parameter calibration. However, researches about the acceleration of SCE-UA and NSGA-II based on heterogeneous parallel computing technique is rare and should be focused in the future.

Keywords

Graphic Processing Unit Artificial Neural Network Model Hydrological Model Central Processing Unit Nondominated Solution 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research was funded by the China Postdoctoral Science Foundation (2016M600096), IWHR Research & Development Support Program (JZ0145B052016), Research on Key Technologies of Real Time Dynamic Control of Water Level in Flood Season of Cascade Reservoirs (KY1734), Construction Project of Shaanxi Province Medium and Small River Hydrological Monitoring and Forecast System - Construction of Guanzhong and North of Shaanxi Flood Forecast Scheme (JZ0205A112015), the Third Sub-Project: Flood Forecasting, Controlling and Flood Prevention Aided Software Development - Flood Control Early Warning Communication System and Flood Forecasting, Controlling and Flood Prevention Aided Software Development for Poyang Lake Area of Jiangxi Province (0628-136006104242, JZ0205A432013, SLXMB200902), Major International (Regional) Joint Research Project - China's Water and Food Security under Extreme Climate Change Impact: Risk Assessment and Resilience (G0305, 7141101024), International Project (71461010701), Study of Distributed Flood Risk Forecast Model and Technology Based on Multi-source Data Integration and Hydro Meteorological Coupling System (2013CB036406), China National Flash Flood Disaster Prevention and Control Project (126301001000150068), and National Key Research and Development Plan (2016YFC0803107). We gratefully acknowledge the support of NVIDIA Corporation with the donation of the Tesla K40 GPU used for this research.

References

  1. 1.
    Abbott MB, Bathurst JC, Cunge JA, O’Connell PE, Rasmussen J (1986) An introduction to the European hydrological system—systeme hydrologique Europeen “SHE” 1: history and philosophy of a physically based distributed modeling system. J Hydrol 87:45–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Abbott MB, Bathurst JC, Cunge JA, O’Connell PE, Rasmussen J (1986) An introduction to the European hydrological system—systeme hydrologique Europeen “SHE” 2: structure of a physically—based distributed modeling system. J Hydrol 87:61–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Abrahart RJ, See L (2000) Comparing neural network and autoregressive moving average techniques for the provision of continuous river flow forecasts in two contrasting catchments. Hydrol Processes 14:2157–2172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Amarasekera KN, Lee RF, Willianms ER, Eltahir EAB (1997) ENSO and the natural variability in the flow of tropical rivers. J Hydrol 200:24–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ambroise B, Beven KJ, Freer J (1996) Towards a generalisation of the TOPMODEL concepts: topographic indices of hydrological similarity. Water Resour Res 32(7):2135–2145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Anderson MG, Burt TP (1990) Process studies in hillslope hydrology. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Anderson J, Refsgaard JC, Jensen KH (2001) Distributed hydrological modeling of the Senegal River Basin—model construction and validation. J Hydrol 247:200–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Arnold J G, Williams J R, Srinivasan R, (1997) Model theory of SWAT. USDA, Agricultural Research Service Grassland, Soil and Water Research Laboratory, TempleGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Astatkie T, Watts DG, Watt WE (1997) Nested threshold autoregressive (NeTAR) models. Int J Forecast 13(1):105–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Awadallahl AG, Rousselle J (2000) Improving forecasts of Nile flood using SST inputs in TFN model. J Hydrol Eng 5(4):371–379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ballini R, Soares S, Andrade MG (2001) Multi-step-ahead monthly streamflow forecasting by a neurofuzzy network model. Vol. 2, Proceedings of the Joint 9th IFSA World Congress and 20th NAFIPS International Conference, Vancouver, pp 992–997Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bathurst JC (1986) Physically—based distributed modeling of an upland catchment using the systeme hydrologique Europeen. J Hydrol 87:79–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bathurst JC, Wicks JM, O’Connell PE (1995) The SHE/SHESED basin scale water flow and sediment transport modeling system. In: Singh VP (ed) Computer models of watershed hydrology. Water Resource Publications, Littleton, pp 563–594.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Becker RW, Lago GV (1970). A global optimization algorithm. Proceedings of the 8th Allerton Conference on Circuits and Systems Theory, Monticello, pp 3–12Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Beven KJ, Kirkby MJ (1979) A physically based variable contributing area model of basin hydrology. Hydrolog Sci Bull 24(1):43–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Beven KJ, Wood EF (1983) Catchment geomorphology and the dynamics of runoff contributing areas. J Hydrol 65:139–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Beven KJ (1989) Changing ideas in hydrology - the case of physically based models. J Hydrol 105:157–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Beven K, Lamb R, Quinn P, Romanowicz R, Freer J (1995) Chapter 18: TOPMODEL. In: Singh VP (ed) Computer models of watershed hydrology. Water Resources Publications, Littleton, pp 627–668Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Beven KJ (2000) Rainfall-runoff modeling: the primer. Wiley, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Beven KJ, Kirkby MJ, Schofield N, Tagg AF (1984) Testing a physically based flood—forecasting model (TOPMODEL) for three UK catchments. J Hydrol 69:119–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Birikundavyi S, Labib R, Trung HT, Rousselle J (2002) Performance of neural networks in daily streamflow forecasting. J Hydrol Eng 7(5):392–398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Borah DK, Prasad SN, Alonso CV (1980) Kinematic wave routing incorporating shock fitting. Water Resour Res 16(3):529–541CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bordignon S, Lisi F (2000) Nonlinear analysis and prediction of river flow time series. Environmetrics 1:463–477CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Brockoff D, Zitzler E (2006) Are all objective necessary on dimensionality reduction in evolutionary multi-objective optimization. In: Runarsson TP, Beyer HG, Burke E, Merelo-Guervós JJ, Whitley LD, Yao X (eds) Parallel problem solving from nature, PPSN IX. LNCS. Springer, Berlin, pp 533–542CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Butts MB, Payne JT, Kristensen M, Madsen H (2004) An evaluation of the impact of model structure and complexity on hydrologic modelling uncertainty for streamflow prediction. J Hydrol 298:242–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Cai Y, Wang D (1996) Correlation analysis between the land surface temperature field and the variation of the runoff within a year. Plateau Meteorol, 15(4):472–477 (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Calver A, Wood WL (1995) The Institute of hydrology distributed model. In: Singh VP (ed) Computer models of watershed hydrology. Water Resources Publications, Littleton pp 595–626Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Chang FJ, Chen YC (2001) A counterpropagation fuzzy-neural network modeling approach to real time streamflow prediction. J Hydrol 245:153–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Chen JY, Tang CY, Sakura Y (2004) Measurement and analysis of the redistribution of soil moisture and solutes in a maize field in the lower reaches of the Yellow River. Hydrol Processes 18(12):2263–2273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Cigizoglu HK (2003) Incorporation of ARMA models into flow forecasting by artificial neural networks. Environmetrics 14(4):417–427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Coello Coello CA, Pulido GT (2001) A micro-genetic algorithm for multiobjective optimization. In: Spector L, Goodman ED, Wu A, Langdon WB, Voigt HM, Gen M (eds) Proceedings of the genetic and evolutionary computation conference, GECCO 2001. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Francisco, pp 274–282Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Coello Coello CA, Pulido GT, Lechuga MS (2004) Handing multiple objectives with particle swarm optimization. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 8(3):256–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Corne DW, Knowles JD, Oates MJ (2000) The Pareto-envelop based selection algorithm for multi-objective optimization. In: Schoenauer M, Deb K, Rudolph G, Yao X, Lutton E, Merelo JJ, Schwefel HP (eds) Parallel problem solving from nature, PPSN VI. LNCS. Springer, Berlin, pp 869–878Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Corne DW, Jerram NR, Knowles JD, Oates MJ (2001) PESA-II: region-based selection in evolutionary multi-objective optimization. In: Spector L, Goodman ED, Wu A, Langdon WB, Voigt HM, Gen M (eds) Proceedings of the genetic and evolutionary computation conference, GECCO 2001. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Francisco, pp 283–290Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Dawson CW, Wilby RL (2001) Hydrological modeling using artificial neural networks. Prog Phys Geogr 25(1):80–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Dawson CW, Harpham C, Wilby RL, Chen Y (2002) Evaluation of artificial neural network techniques for flow forecasting in the river Yangtze, China. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 6(4):619–626CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    De Roo APJ, Bartholmes J, Bates PD, Beven K (2003) Development of a European flood forecasting system. J River Basin Manag 1(1):49–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    De Roo APJ, Wesseling CG, Van Deursen WPA (2000) Physically based river basin modeling within a GIS: the LISFLOOD model. Hydrol Processes 14:1981–1992CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Deb K, 2001. Multi-objective optimization using evolutionary algorithms. Wiley, ChichesterMATHGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Deb K, Saxena DK, (2005) On finding Pareto-optimal solutions through dimensionality reduction for certain large-dimensional multi-objective optimization problems. Technical Report, 2005011, Kalyanmoy Deb and Dhish Kumar Saxena, Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Deb K, Pratap A, Agarwal S, Meyarivan T (2002) A fast and elitist multi-objective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 6(2):182–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Dettinger MD, Cayan DR, Redmond KT (1999) United States streamflow probabilities based on forecasted La Nina, winter-spring 2000. Exp Long-Lead Forecast Bull, 8(4):1–5Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Dettinger MD, Cayan DR, McCabe GJ, Redmond KT (2000) Winter-spring 2001 United States streamflow probabilities based on anticipated neutral ENSO conditions and recent NPO status. Exp Long-Lead Forecast Bull, 9(3):55–60Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Dettinger MD, Cayan DR, Redmond KT (2002) United States streamflow probabilities and uncertainties based on anticipated El Nino, water year 2003. Exp Long-Lead Forecast Bull 11(3):46Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Dibike YB, Solomatine DP (2001) River flow forecasting using artificial neural networks. J Phys Chem Earth Part B 26(1):1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Dixon L.C.W., Szegő GP (1978) The global optimization problem: an introduction, toward global optimization 2, Edited by L.C.W. Dixon and G.P. Szegő. North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp 1–15Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Dong J, Zheng C, Kan G, Wen J, Zhao M, Yu J (2015) Applying the ensemble artificial neural network-based hybrid data-driven model to daily total load forecasting. Neural Comput Appl, 26 (3):603–611CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Druce DJ (2001) Insights from a history of seasonal inflow forecasting with a conceptual hydrologic model. J Hydrol 249:102–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Duan J, Miller NL (1997) A generalized power function for the subsurface transmissivity profile in TOPMODEL. Water Resour Res 33(11):2559–2562CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Duan Q, 1991. A global optimization strategy for efficient and effective calibration of hydrologic models. Ph.D. thesis, Dept. of Hydrology and Water Resources, Univ. of Arizona, TucsonGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Duan Q, Sorooshianz S, Gupta V (1992) Effective and efficient global optimization for conceptual rainfall-runoff models. Water Resour Res 28(4):1015–1031CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Duan Q, Gupta V, Sorooshian S (1993) A shuffled complex evolution approach for effective and efficient global minimization. J. Optim. Meth. Appl. 76 (3):501–521MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Duan Q, Sorooshian S, Gupta V (1994) Optimal use of the SCE-UA global optimization method for calibrating watershed models. J Hydrol 158(3–4):265–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Eldaw AK, Salas JD, Garcia LA (2003) Long-range forecasting of the Nile River flows using climatic forcing. J Appl Meteorol 42(7):890–904CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Eltahaia EAB (1996) El Nino and the natural variability in the flow of the Nile River. Water Resour Res 32(1):131–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Erickson M, Mayer A, Horn J (2001) The niched Pareto genetic algorithm 2 applied to the design of groundwater remediation system. In: Zitzler E, Deb K, Thiele L, Coello Coello CA, Corne D (eds) Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Evolutionary Multi-Criterion Optimization, EMO 2001. Springer, Berlin, pp 681–695Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Fast B (1990) Analysis of seasonal inflow volume forecasts produced using regression equations. Operations Control Department, British Columbia Hydro. CanadaGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Fernando DAK, Jayawardena AW (1998) Runoff forecasting using RBF networks with OLS algorithm. J Hydrol Eng 3(3):203–209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Franchini M, Wendling J, Obled C, Todini E (1996) Physical interpretation and sensitivity analysis of the TOPMODEL. J Hydrol 175:293–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Freeze RA, Harlan RL (1969) Blueprint for a physically-based digitally-simulated hydrological response model. J Hydrol 9:237–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Fu G, Liu C (2001) Application and research proceedings of the remote sensing technology applied to hydrology. Adv Water Sci 12(4):547–559 (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Gomulka J (1978) Deterministic versus probabilistic approaches to global optimization, Toward Global Optimization 2, Edited by L.C.W. Dixon and G.P. Szegő. North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp 19–29Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Gong MG, Jiao LC, Du HF, Bo LF (2008) Multiobjective immune algorithm with nondominated neighbor-based selection. Evol Comput 16(2):225–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Gong M, Jiao L, Yang D, Ma W (2009) Study of evolutionary multi-objective optimization algorithm. J Softw 20(2):271–289MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Guo S, Xiong L (2000) DEM-based physically distributed watershed hydrological model. J Wuh Univ Hydraulic Electric 33(6):1–5MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Guo S, Xiong L (2001) Application and validation of physically distributed watershed hydrological model. J Wuh Univ 34(1):1–5Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Guo SL (2002) Two parameter monthly water balance model, mathematical models of large watershed hydrology. In: Singh V P, Frevert DK (eds) mathematical models of small watershed hydrology and applications. Water Resources Publications, Littleton, pp 511–554Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Grayson RB, Moore ID, McMahon TA (1992) Physically based hydrologic modeling, 1: a terrain—based model for investigative purposes. Water Resour Res 28(10):2639–2658CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Grayson RB, Moore ID, McMahon TA (1992) Physically based hydrologic modeling, 2: is the concept realistic? Water Resour Res 28(10):2659–2666CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Grayson RB, Bloschl G, Moore ID (1995) Distributed parameter hydrologic modeling using vector elevation data: THALES and TAPES – C. In: Singh VP (ed) Computer models of watershed hydrology.. Water Resource Publications, Littleton, pp 669–696Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Guo F, Liu X, Ren L (2000) Watershed hydrological model based on topography. Adv Water Sci 11(3):296–301 (Chinese)Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Guo SL, Wang JX, Xiong LH (2002) A macro-scale and semi-distributed monthly water balance model to predict climate change impacts in China. J Hydrol 268:1–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Gutierrez F, Dracup JA (2001) An analysis of the feasibility of long-range streamflow forecasting for Colombia using El Nino-Southern Oscillation indicators. J Hydrol 246:181–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Hamlet AF, Lettenmaier DP (1999) Columbia River streamflow forecasting based on ENSO and PDO climate signals. J Water Resour Plann Manag 125(6):33–341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Han D, Cluckie ID, Karbassioun D, Lawry J, Krauskopf B (2002) River flow modeling using fuzzy decision trees. Water Resour Manag 16:431–445CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Hernández-Díaz AG, Santana-Quintero LV, Coello Coello CA, Molina J (2007) Pareto-adaptive—dominance. Evol Comput 15(4):493–517CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Holland JH (1975) Adaption in natural and artificial systems. University of Michigan Press, Ann ArborMATHGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Hooke R, Jeeves TA (1961) Direct search solutions of numerical and statistical problems. Assoc Comput Mach 8(2):212–229MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Hu TS, Lam KC, Ng ST (2001) River flow time series prediction with a range-dependent neural network. Hydrolog Sci J, 46(5):729–745CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Huang M, Zhang L (2004) Hydrological responses to conservation practices in a catchment of the Loess Plateau, China. Hydrol Processes 8(10):1885–1898CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Huang P, Zhao J (1997) Study and outlook of the watershed distributed hydrological mathematic model. J China Hydrol 17(5):5–10 (Chinese)Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    Hughes DA (2004) Incorporating groundwater recharge and discharge functions into an existing monthly rainfall-runoff model. Hydrol Sci J-J des Sci Hydrol 49(2):297–311.Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    Huo S, Rao S, Xue J (2001) Inflow forecast for the Sanmen Gorge reservoir of the yellow river during non-flooding period. Yellow River 23(12):14–16 (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    Imrie CE, Durucan S, Korre A (2000) River flow prediction using artificial neural networks: generalization beyond the calibration range. J Hydrol 233:138–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Jain SK, Das A, Srivastava DK (1999) Application of ANN for reservoir inflow prediction and operation. J Water Resour Plann Manag 125(5):263–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Jain SK, Singh RD, Seth SM (2000) Design flood estimation using GIS supported GIUH approach. Water Resources. Management 14:369–376Google Scholar
  87. 87.
    Jia Y, Wang H, Ni G, Yang D, Wang J, Qin D (2005) Principle and application of distributed watershed hydrological model. China WaterPower Press, Beijing (Chinese)Google Scholar
  88. 88.
    Julien PY, Saghafian B, Ogden FL (1995) Raster—based hydrological modeling of spatially—varied surface runoff. Water Resour Bull 31(3):523–536CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Kan G, Yao C, Li Q, Li Z, Yu Z, Liu Z, Ding L, He X, Liang K (2015) Improving event-based rainfall-runoff simulation using an ensemble artificial neural network based hybrid data-driven model. Stoch Env Res Risk A 29:1345–1370CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Kan G, Li J, Zhang X, Ding L, He X, Liang K, Jiang X, Ren M, Li H, Wang F, Zhang Z, Hu Y (2015) A new hybrid data-driven model for event-based rainfall-runoff simulation. Neural Comput Appl. doi: 10.1007/s00521-016-2200-4 Google Scholar
  91. 91.
    Kan G, He X, Li J, Ding L, Zhang D, Lei T, Hong Y, Liang K, Zuo D, Bao Z, Zhang M (2016) A novel hybrid data-driven model for multi-input single-output system simulation. Neural Comput Appl. doi: 10.1007/s00521-016-2534-y.Google Scholar
  92. 92.
    Kan G, Liang K, Li J, Ding L, He X, Hu Y, Amo-Boateng M (2016) Accelerating the SCE-UA global optimization method based on multi-core CPU and many-core GPU. Adv Meteorol. doi: 10.1155/2016/8483728.Google Scholar
  93. 93.
    Kan G, Lei T, Liang K, Li J, Ding L, He X, Yu H, Zhang D, Zuo D, Bao Z, Mark Amo-boateng, Hu Y, Zhang M (2016) A multi-core CPU and many-core GPU based fast parallel shuffled complex evolution global optimization approach. IEEE Trans Parallel Distrib Syst. doi: 10.1109/TPDS.2016.2575822 Google Scholar
  94. 94.
    Kan G, Zhang M, Liang K, Wang H, Jiang Y, Li J, Ding L, He X, Hong Y, Zuo D, Bao Z, Li C (2016) Improving water quantity simulation & forecasting to solve the energy-water-food nexus issue by using heterogeneous computing accelerated global optimization method. Appl Energy. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.08.017 Google Scholar
  95. 95.
    Kang KW, Kim JH, Park CY, Ham KJ, 1993. Evaluation of hydrological forecasting system based on neural network model. In: Proceedings of 25th Congress of International Association for Hydrology Researches, IAHR, Delft, pp 257–264Google Scholar
  96. 96.
    Karnopp DC (1963) Random search techniques for optimization problems. Automatic 1:111–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Kisi O (2004) River flow modeling using artificial neural networks. J Hydrol Eng 9(1):60–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Knowles JD, Corne DW (2000) Approximating the non-dominated front using the Pareto archived evolution strategy. Evol Comput 8(2):149–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Kuo IT, Sun YH (1993) An intervention model for average 10 day streamflow forecast and synthesis. J Hydrol 151(1):35–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Laumanns M, Thiele L, Deb K, Zitzler E (2002) Combining convergence and diversity in evolutionary multi-objective optimization. Evol Comput 10(3):263–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Leung LR, Wigmosta MS, Ghan SJ, Epstein DJ, Vail LW (1996) Application of a subgrid orographic precipitation/surface hydrology scheme to a mountain watershed. J Geophys Res 101(D8):12803–12817CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. 102.
    Li C, Cheng X, Li N, Du X, Yu Q, Kan G (2016) A framework for flood risk analysis and benefit assessment of flood control measures in urban areas. Int J Environ Res Public Health 13:787. doi: 10.3390/ijerph13080787 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    Li D, Tian Y, Liu C (2004) Impact of Land-cover and climate change on runoff of the source regions of the Yellow River. J Geog Sci 14(3):330–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    Li J (1998) Comparison of monthly rainfall-runoff models for catchments in northern China. Adv Water Sci 9(3):282–288 (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  105. 105.
    Li Z, Kan G, Yao C, Liu Z, Li Q, Yu S (2014) An improved neural network model and its application in hydrological simulation. J Hydrol Eng 19(10):04014019CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. 106.
    Li Z, Kong F, Wang D, Chen J, Y J (2010) Model hydrological simulation and forecasting technology. Hohai University Press, NanjingGoogle Scholar
  107. 107.
    Liu Q, Islam S, Rodriguez-Iturbe I, Le Y (1998) Phase-space analysis of daily streamflow: characterization and prediction. Adv Water Resour 21:463–475CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. 108.
    Liang X, Lettenmaier DP, Wood EF, Burges SJ (1994) A simple hydrologically based model of land surface water and energy fluxes for general circulation models. J Geophys Res 99(D7):14415–14428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. 109.
    Liu G, Jiang H, Wang J (1994) Anthology of renjun zhao in hydrological forecasting. Water Power Press, BeijingGoogle Scholar
  110. 110.
    Lu H, Shao D, Guo Y (1996) Research n long-term runoff forecasting for the Danjiangkou Reservoir. J Wuh Hydraul Hydropower Univ 29(6):6–10 (Chinese)Google Scholar
  111. 111.
    Loghmanian SMR, Ahmad HJR, Khalid RYM (2012) Structure optimization of neural network for dynamic system modeling using multi-objective genetic algorithm. Neural Comput Appl, 21:1281–1295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. 112.
    Mahabir C, Hicks FE, Robinson FA (2003) Application of fuzzy logic to forecast seasonal runoff. Hydrol Processes 17:3749–3762CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. 113.
    Maier HR, Dandy GC (2000) Neural networks for the prediction and forecasting of water resources variables: a review of modellinig issues and applications. Environ Modell Softw 15:101–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. 114.
    Masri SF, Bekey GA, Safford FB, 1978. An adaptive random search method for identification of large scale nonlinear systems. Proceedings of 4th IFAC Symposium on Identification and System Parameter Estimation 1976, AmsterdamMATHGoogle Scholar
  115. 115.
    McKerchar AI, Delleur JW (1974) Application of seasonal parametric linear stochastic models to monthly flow data. Water Resources Res 10:246–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. 116.
    Milanese M, Novara C (2004) Nonlinear set membership prediction of river flow. Syst Control Lett 53:31–39MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. 117.
    Montanari A, Rosso R, Taqqu MS (2000) A seasonal fractional ARIMA model applied to the Nile River monthly at Aswan. Water Resour Res 36:1249–1259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. 118.
    Moradkhani H, Hsu KL, Gupta HV, Sorooshian S (2004) Improved stream flow forecasting using self-organizing radial basis function artificial neural networks. J Hydrol 295:246–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. 119.
    Nayak PC, Sudheerb KP, Ranganc DM, Ramasastri KS (2004) A neuro-fuzzy computing technique for modeling hydrological time series. J Hydrol 291(1–2):52–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. 120.
    Neitsch SL, Arnold JG, Kiniry JR, Williams JR, King KW (2000) Soil and water assessment tool theoretical documentation. Texas Water Resources Institute (TWRI), Report TR-191, College StationGoogle Scholar
  121. 121.
    Noakes DJ, McLeod AI, Hipel KW (1985) Forecasting monthly riverflow time series. Int J Forecasting 1:179–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. 122.
    Novara C, Milanese M, 2001. Set membership prediction of nonlinear time series. In: Proceedings of the 40th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, Orlando, pp 2131–2136Google Scholar
  123. 123.
    Ooms M, Franses PH (2001) A seasonal periodic long memory model for monthly river flows. Environ Modell Softw, 16:559–569CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  124. 124.
    Orlandini S, Rosso R (1996) Diffusion wave modeling of distributed catchment dynamics. J Hydrol Eng 1(3):101–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  125. 125.
    Peng M, Ge Z, Wang H (2000) The relationship between the runoff of the upstream Yellow River and the sea surface temperature of the Pacific and its application for prediction. Adv Water Sci, 1(3):272–276 (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  126. 126.
    Piechota TC, Dracup JA, Chiew FHS, McMahon TA (1998) Seasonal streamflow forecasting in Eastern Australia and the El Nino-Southrn Oscillation. Water Resour Res 34(11):3035–3044CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  127. 127.
    Piechota TC, Dracup JA (1999) Long-range streamflow forecasting using El-Nino Southern Oscillation indicators. J Hydrol Eng 4(2):144–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  128. 128.
    Porporato A, Ridolfi L (2001) Multivariate nonlinear prediction of river flows. J Hydrol 248:109–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  129. 129.
    Price WL (1978) A controlled random search procedure for global optimization, Toward Global Optimization 2, Edited by L.C.W. Dixon and G.P. Szegő. North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp 71–84Google Scholar
  130. 130.
    Price WL (1983) Global optimization by controlled random search. J Optim Theory Appl 40:333–348MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  131. 131.
    Price WL (1987) Global optimization algorithms for a CAD workstation. J Optim Theory Appl 55:133–146MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  132. 132.
    Pronzatio L, Walter E, Venot A, 1984. A general purpose global optimizer: implementation and applications. Math Comput Simul 26:412–422MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  133. 133.
    Raman H, Sunilkumar N (1995) Multivariate modeling of water resources time series using artificial neural network. Hydrol Sci J, 40(2):145–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  134. 134.
    Refsgaard JC, Storm B (1995) MIKE SHE. In: Singh VP (ed) Computer Models of Watershed Hydrology, 809–846. Water Resource Publications, LittletonGoogle Scholar
  135. 135.
    Refagaard JC (1997) Parameterisation, calibration, and validation of distributed hydrological models. J Hydrol 198:69–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  136. 136.
    Ren L, Liu X (1999) Application of DEM to drainage network topology calculation. Adv Water Sci, 10(2):129–134. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  137. 137.
    Ren L (2000) Research on watershed numerical hydrological model. J Hohai Univ 28(4):1–6 (Chinese)Google Scholar
  138. 138.
    Ren L, Liu X (2000) Hydrological physical process simulation based on DEM. Geogr Res 19(4):369–376 (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  139. 139.
    Rinnooy-Kan, AHG., Timmer GT (1987) Stochastic global optimization methdos, part 1: clustering methods. Math Program 39:27–56MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  140. 140.
    Rosenbrock HH (1960) An automatic method for finding the greatest or least value of a function. Comput J 3:175–184MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  141. 141.
    Rui X (2004) Principles of hydrology. China WaterPower Press, Beijing (Chinese)Google Scholar
  142. 142.
    Rui X, Jiang C, Zhang J (2006) Development of watershed hydrological model. J China Hydrol 26(3):22–26 (Chinese)Google Scholar
  143. 143.
    Rui X, Liu F, Xing Z (2007) Development of hydrology and some frontier scientific issues it faces. Adv Sci Technol Water Resour 27(1):75–79 (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  144. 144.
    Sajikumar N, Thandaveswara BS (1999) A nonlinear rainfall runoff model using an artificial neural network. J Hydrol 216:32–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  145. 145.
    Saxena DK, Deb K (2007) Non-Linear dimensionality reduction procedure for certain large-dimensional multi-objective optimization problems: Employing correntropy and a novel maximum variance unfolding. In: Coello Coello CA, Aguirre AH, Zitzler E (eds) Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Evolutionary Multi-Criterion Optimization, EMO 2007. Springer, Berlin, pp 772–787Google Scholar
  146. 146.
    Senarath US (2000) On the calibration and verification of two dimensional, distributed, Hortonian, continuous watershed models. Water Resour Res 36(6):1495–1510CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  147. 147.
    Shamseldin AY, O’Connor KM (1996) A nearest neighbor linear perturbation model for river flow forecasting. J Hydrol 179:353–375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  148. 148.
    Shrestha A, Kostaschuk R (2005) El Nino/Southern Oscillation (ENSO)-related variability in mean-monthly streamflow in Nepal. J Hydrol 308:33–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  149. 149.
    Sivakumar B, Berndtsson R, Persson M (2001) Monthly runoff prediction using phase space reconstruction. Hydrol Sci J 46(3):377–387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  150. 150.
    Solomatine DP, 2002. Data-driven modeling: paradigm, methods, experiences. Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Hydroinformatics, Cardiff pp 757–763Google Scholar
  151. 151.
    Solomatine DP, Dulal KN (2003) Models trees as an alternative to neural networks in rainfall-runoff modeling. Hydrol Sci J 48(3):399–411CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  152. 152.
    Solomatine DP, Xue Y (2004) M5 model trees compared to neural networks: application to flood forecasting in the upper reach of the Huai River in China. J Hydrol Eng 9(6):491–501CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  153. 153.
    Tawfik M (2003) Linearity versus non-linearity in forecasting Nile River flows. Adv Eng Software 34:515–524CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  154. 154.
    Thompstone RM, Hipel KW, Mcleod AI (1985) Forecasting quarter-monthly riverflow. Water Resour Bull 21(5):731–741CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  155. 155.
    Tokar AS, Markus M (2000) Precipitation-runoff modeling using artificial neural network and conceptual models. J Hydrol Eng 5(2):156–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  156. 156.
    Tomasino M, Zanchetin D, Traverso P (2004) Long-range forecasts of River Po discharges based on predictable solar activity and a fuzzy neural network model. Hydrol Sci J 49(4):673–684CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  157. 157.
    Tőrn A (1978) A search clustering approach to global optimization, Toward Global Optimization 2, Edited by L.C.W. Dixon and G.P. Szegő. North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp 49–62Google Scholar
  158. 158.
    Tőrn A, Zilinskas A (1989) Global optimization, Springer, BerlinMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  159. 159.
    Tucci CEM, Clarke RT, Collischonn W, da Silva Dias PL, de Oliveira GS (2003) Long-term flow forecasts based on climate and hydrologic modeling: Uruguay River basin. Water Resour Res 39(7):SWC 3-1-11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  160. 160.
    Uvo CB, Graham NE (1998) Seasonal runoff forecast for northern South America: a statistical model. Water Resources Res 34(12):3515–3524CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  161. 161.
    Vazquez RF, Feyen L, Feyen J, Refsgaard JC (2002) Effect of grid size on effective parameters and model performance of the MIKE – SHE code. Hydrol Processes 16(2):355–372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  162. 162.
    Vigay Singh P (1995) Computer models of watershed hydrology. Water Resources Publications, LittletonGoogle Scholar
  163. 163.
    Wang G, Shen Y, Liu S (2001) On the characteristics of response of precipitation and runoff to ENSO events in the headwater regions of the Yellow River. J Glaciol Geocryol 23(1):16–21 (Chinese)Google Scholar
  164. 164.
    Wang M, Hjelmfelt AT (1998) DEM based overland flow routing model. J Hydrol Eng 3(1):1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  165. 165.
    Wang Z, Liu C, Huang Y (2003) Study and application of SWAT model and its structure. Adv Geosci 22(1):79–86 (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  166. 166.
    Wigmosta MS, Vail LW, Lettenmaier DP (1994) A distributed hydrology—vegetation model for complex terrain. Water Resour Res 30(6):1665–1679CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  167. 167.
    Wigmosta MS, Leung LR, Rykiel E (1995) Regional modeling of climate—terrestrial ecosystems interactions. J Biogeogr 22:453–465CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  168. 168.
    Woolhiser DA (1996) Search for physically based runoff model—a hydrologic El Dorado? J Hydraul Eng 122(3):122–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  169. 169.
    Xia J, Wang G, Lv A, Tan G (2003) Distributed time gain watershed water cycling simulation. Geogr Sci 58(5):789–796 (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  170. 170.
    Xiong L, Guo S, Hu C (2002) Application and study of the TOPMODEL for watershed runoff simulation. J China Hydrol 22(5):5–8 (Chinese)Google Scholar
  171. 171.
    Yang D, Srikantha H, Katumi M (2001) Spatial resolution sensitivity of catchment geomorphologic properties and the effect on hydrological simulation. Hydrol Processes 11:2085–2099CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  172. 172.
    Yang G, Hao F, Liu C (2003) SWAT model based base flow estimation and assessment—A case study in Luo River. Adv Geosci 22(5):463–471 (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  173. 173.
    Yao HX, Michio H (2001) A completely—formed distributed rainfall—runoff model for the catchment scale. IAHS Publ 270:183–190Google Scholar
  174. 174.
    Yu X, Liu X (2002) Distributed snowmelt-rainfall hybrid hydrological model. J Hohai Univ 30(5):23–27 (Chinese)Google Scholar
  175. 175.
    Zhang D, Zhang J, Liu F (2007) Discussions on nonlinearity effects in hydrology. Adv Water Sci 18(5):776–784 (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  176. 176.
    Zhang QF, Li H (2007) MOEA/D: A multiobjective evolutionary algorithm based on decomposition. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 11(6):712–731CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  177. 177.
    Zhang QF, Zhou AM, Jin Y (2007) RM-MEDA: a regularity model based multiobjective estimation of distribution algorithm. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 12(1):41–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  178. 178.
    Zhao R (1994) Corpus of hydrological forecasting. Water Power Press, BeijingGoogle Scholar
  179. 179.
    Zhou AM, Zhang QF, Jin Y, Sendhoff B, Tsang E (2007) Global multi-objective optimization via estimation of distribution algorithm with biased initialization and crossover. In: Thierens D, Beyer HG, Bongard J, Branke J, Clark JA, Cliff D, Congdon CB, Deb K (eds) Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, GECCO 2007. ACM Press, New York, pp 617–622Google Scholar
  180. 180.
    Zitzler E, Laumanns M, Thiele L (2002) SPEA2: Improving the strength Pareto evolutionary algorithm. In: Giannakoglou K, Tsahalis DT, Périaux J, Papailiou KD, Fogarty T (eds) Evolutionary Methods for Design, Optimization and Control with Applications to Industrial Problems. Springer, Berlin, pp 95–100Google Scholar
  181. 181.
    Zitzler E, Thiele L (1999) Multi-objective evolutionary algorithms: a comparative case study and the strength Pareto approach. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 3(4):257–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© US Government 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Guangyuan Kan
    • 1
    • 2
  • Xiaoyan He
    • 1
  • Jiren Li
    • 1
  • Liuqian Ding
    • 1
  • Yang Hong
    • 2
    • 3
  • Hongbin Zhang
    • 1
  • Ke Liang
    • 4
  • Mengjie Zhang
    • 5
  1. 1.State Key Laboratory of Simulation and Regulation of Water Cycle in River Basin, Research Center on Flood & Drought Disaster Reduction of the Ministry of Water ResourcesChina Institute of Water Resources and Hydropower ResearchBeijingPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.State Key Laboratory of Hydroscience and Engineering, Department of Hydraulic EngineeringTsinghua UniversityBeijingPeople’s Republic of China
  3. 3.Department of Civil Engineering and Environmental ScienceUniversity of OklahomaNormanUSA
  4. 4.College of Hydrology and Water ResourcesHohai UniversityNanjingPeople’s Republic of China
  5. 5.State Key Laboratory of Simulation and Regulation of Water Cycle in River Basin, Department of Water Resources (DWR)China Institute of Water Resources and Hydropower ResearchBeijingPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations