Skip to main content

Groundwater Level Simulation Using Soft Computing Methods with Emphasis on Major Meteorological Components

Abstract

Precise estimation of groundwater level (GWL) might be of great importance for attaining sustainable development goals and integrated water resources management. Compared with alternative numerical models, soft computing methods are promising tools for GWL prediction, which need more hydrogeological and aquifer characteristics. The central aim of this research is to explore the performance of such well-accepted data-driven models to predict monthly GWL with emphasis on major meteorological components, including; precipitation (P), temperature (T), and evapotranspiration (ET). Artificial neural network (ANN), fuzzy logic (FL), adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system (ANFIS), group method of data handling (GMDH), and least-square support vector machine (LSSVM) are used to predict one-, two-, and three-month ahead GWL in an unconfined aquifer. The main meteorological components (Tt, ETt, Pt, Pt-1) and GWL for one, two, and three lag-time (GWLt-1, GWLt-2, GWLt-3) are used as input to attain precise prediction. The results show that all models could have the best prediction for one month ahead in scenario 5, comprising inputs of GWLt-1, GWLt-2, GWLt-3, Tt, ETt, Pt, Tt-1, ETt-1, Pt-1. Based on different evaluation criteria, all employed models could predict the GWL with a desirable accuracy, and the results of LSSVM are the superior one.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Availability of Data and Materials

The data, models, and codes generated or used during the study are available from the corresponding author by request.

References

  • Antonopoulos VZ, Gianniou SK (2022) Analysis and modelling of temperature at the water-atmosphere interface of a lake by energy budget and ANNs models. Environ Process 9(1):1–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bai Y, Wang D (2006) Fundamentals of fuzzy logic control—fuzzy sets, fuzzy rules and defuzzifications. In Advanced fuzzy logic technologies in industrial applications (pp. 17–36). Springer, London

  • Banadkooki FB, Ehteram M, Ahmed AN, Teo FY, Fai CM, Afan HA, El-Shafie A (2020) Enhancement of groundwater-level prediction using an integrated machine learning model optimized by whale algorithm. Nat Resour Res 29(5):3233–3252

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chakraborty S, Maity PK, Das S (2020) Investigation, simulation, identification and prediction of groundwater levels in coastal areas of Purba Midnapur, India, using MODFLOW. Environ Dev Sustain 22(4):3805–3837

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang CC, Lin CJ (2011) LIBSVM: a library for support vector machines. ACM Trans Intell Syst Technol (TIST) 2(3):1–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chiu SL (1994) Fuzzy model identification based on cluster estimation. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 2(3):267–278

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Derbela M, Nouiri I (2020) Intelligent approach to predict future groundwater level based on artificial neural networks (ANN). Euro-Mediterranean J Environ Integ, 5(3), 1-11

  • Ghazi B, Jeihouni E, Kalantari Z (2021) Predicting groundwater level fluctuations under climate change scenarios for Tasuj plain, Iran. Arab J Geosci 14(2):1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gong Y, Zhang Y, Lan S, Wang H (2016) A comparative study of artificial neural networks, support vector machines and adaptive neuro fuzzy inference system for forecasting groundwater levels near Lake Okeechobee, Florida. Water Resour Manage 30(1):375–391

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gu Y, Zhao W, Wu Z (2010) Least squares support vector machine algorithm. J Tsinghua Univ (science and Technology) 7:1063–1066

    Google Scholar 

  • Guzman SM, Paz JO, Tagert MLM, Mercer AE (2019) Evaluation of seasonally classified inputs for the prediction of daily groundwater levels: NARX networks vs support vector machines. Environ Model Assess 24(2):223–234

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haykin S (2004) Neural networks: a comprehensive foundation. Prentice Hall, New Jersey

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill MC, Tiedeman CR (2006) Effective groundwater model calibration: with analysis of data, sensitivities, predictions, and uncertainty. John Wiley & Sons

    Google Scholar 

  • Huang F, Huang J, Jiang SH, Zhou C (2017) Prediction of groundwater levels using evidence of chaos and support vector machine. J Hydroinf 19(4):586–606

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ivakhnenko AG (1968) The group method of data of handling; a rival of the method of stochastic approximation. Soviet Automatic Control 13:43–55

    Google Scholar 

  • Ivakhnenko AG (1970) Heuristic self-organization in problems of engineering cybernetics. Automatica 6(2):207–219

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jang JS (1993) ANFIS: adaptive-network-based fuzzy inference system. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 23(3):665–685

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kasiviswanathan KS, Saravanan S, Balamurugan M, Saravanan K (2016) Genetic programming based monthly groundwater level forecast models with uncertainty quantification. Model Earth Syst Environ 2(1):27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keskin ME, Taylan D, Terzi O (2006) Adaptive neural-based fuzzy inference system (ANFIS) approach for modelling hydrological time series. Hydrol Sci J 51(4), 588-598

  • Khedri A, Kalantari N, Vadiati M (2020) Comparison study of artificial intelligence method for short term groundwater level prediction in the northeast Gachsaran unconfined aquifer. Water Supply 20(3):909–921

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kouziokas GN, Chatzigeorgiou A, Perakis K (2018) Multilayer feed forward models in groundwater level forecasting using meteorological data in public management. Water Resour Manage 32(15):5041–5052

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kumar M, Kar IN (2009) Nonlinear HVAC computations using least square support vector machines. Energy Convers Manage 50(6):1411–1418

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lemke F (1997) Knowledge extraction from data using self-organizing modeling technologies. In Proceedings of the SEAM’97 Conference

  • Lin L, Li S, Sun S, Yuan Y, Yang M (2020) A novel efcient model for gas compressibility factor based on GMDH network. Flow Meas Instrum 71:101677

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mathworks M (2014) Fuzzy logic toolbox. User’s Guide, The Mathworks, Massachusetts

  • McGarry KJ, Wermter S, MacIntyre J (1999) Knowledge extraction from radial basis function networks and multilayer perceptrons. In IJCNN’99. International Joint Conference on Neural Networks. Proceedings (Cat. No. 99CH36339) (vol. 4, pp. 2494–2497). IEEE

  • Miraki S, Zanganeh SH, Chapi K, Singh VP, Shirzadi A, Shahabi H, Pham BT (2019) Mapping groundwater potential using a novel hybrid intelligence approach. Water Resour Manage 33(1):281–302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mirarabi A, Nassery HR, Nakhaei M, Adamowski J, Akbarzadeh AH, Alijani F (2019) Evaluation of data-driven models (SVR and ANN) for groundwaterlevel prediction in confned and unconfned systems. Environ Earth Sci 78(15):489

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moghaddam HK, Milan SG, Kayhomayoon Z, Azar NA (2021) The prediction of aquifer groundwater level based on spatial clustering approach using machine learning. Environ Monit Assess 193(4):1–20

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohammadrezapour O, Kisi O, Pourahmad F (2020) Fuzzy c-means and K-means clustering with genetic algorithm for identification of homogeneous regions of groundwater quality. Neural Comput Appl 32(8):3763–3775

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moosavi V, Mahjoobi J, Hayatzadeh M (2021) Combining group method of data handling with signal processing approaches to improve accuracy of groundwater level modeling. Nat Resour Res 30(2):1735–1754

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moriasi DN, Gitau MW, Pai N, Daggupati P (2015) Hydrologic and water quality models: Performance measures and evaluation criteria. Trans ASABE 58(6):1763–1785

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mozaffari S, Javadi S, Moghaddam HK, Randhir TO (2022) Forecasting groundwater levels using a hybrid of support vector regression and particle swarm optimization. Water Resour Manage 1–18

  • Mueller JA, Ivachnenko AG, Lemke F (1998) GMDH algorithms for complex systems modelling. Math Comput Model Dyn Syst 4(4):275–316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nadiri AA, Gharekhani M, Khatibi R, Sadeghfam S, Moghaddam AA (2017) Groundwater vulnerability indices conditioned by supervised intelligence committee machine (SICM). Sci Total Environ 574:691–706

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naganna SR, Beyaztas BH, Bokde N, Armanuos AM (2020) On the evaluation of the gradient tree boosting model for groundwater level forecasting. Knowledge-Based Engr and Sci, 1(01), 48-57

  • Najafzadeh M, Barani GA, Azamathulla HM (2013) GMDH to predict scour depth around a pier in cohesive soils. Appl Ocean Res 40:35–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nariman-Zadeh N, Darvizeh A, Darvizeh M, Gharababaei H (2002) Modelling of explosive cutting process of plates using GMDH-type neural network and singular value decomposition. J Mater Process Technol 128(1–3):80–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Natarajan N, Sudheer C (2020) Groundwater level forecasting using soft computing techniques. Neural Comput Appl 32(12):7691–7708

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nguyen HT, Prasad NR, Walker CL, Walker EA (2002) A first course in fuzzy and neural control. CRC Press

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Nourani V, Mousavi S (2016a) Spatiotemporal groundwater level modeling using hybrid artifcial intelligencemeshless method. J Hydrol 536:10–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nourani V, Mousavi S (2016b) Spatiotemporal groundwater level modeling using hybrid artificial intelligence-meshless method. J Hydrol 536:10–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patel MB, Patel JN, Bhilota UM (2022) Comprehensive modelling of ANN. In Research Anthology on Artificial Neural Network Applications (pp. 31–40). IGI Global

  • Platt JC (1999) Fast training of support vector machines using sequential minimal optimization, advances in kernel methods. Supp Vect Learn 185–208

  • Poursaeid M, Poursaeid AH, Shabanlou S (2022) A comparative study of artificial intelligence models and a statistical method for groundwater level prediction. Water Resour Manage 1–21

  • Rahbar A, Mirarabi A, Nakhaei M, Talkhabi M, Jamali M (2022) A comparative analysis of data-driven models (SVR, ANFIS, and ANNs) for daily Karst spring discharge prediction. Water Resour Manage 1–21

  • Rajaee T, Ebrahimi H, Nourani V (2019) A review of the artificial intelligence methods in groundwater level modeling. J Hydrol 572:336–351

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Razzagh S, Sadeghfam S, Nadiri AA, Busico G, Ntona MM, Kazakis N (2021) Formulation of Shannon entropy model averaging for groundwater level prediction using artificial intelligence models. Int J Environ Sci Technol 1–18

  • Rezaei M, Mousavi SF, Moridi A, Gordji ME, Karami H (2021) A new hybrid framework based on integration of optimization algorithms and numerical method for estimating monthly groundwater level. Arab J Geosci 14(11):1–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roshni T, Jha MK, Deo RC, Vandana A (2019) Development and evaluation of hybrid artificial neural network architectures for modeling spatio-temporal groundwater fluctuations in a complex aquifer system. Water Resour Manage 33(7):2381–2397

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roy DK (2021) Long short-term memory networks to predict one-step ahead reference evapotranspiration in a subtropical climatic zone. Environ Process 8(2):911–941

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sahoo S, Jha MK (2013) Groundwater-level prediction using multiple linear regression and artificial neural network techniques: a comparative assessment. Hydrogeol J 21(8):1865–1887

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sahu RK, Müller J, Park J, Varadharajan C, Arora B, Faybishenko B, Agarwal D (2020) Impact of input feature selection on groundwater level prediction from a multi-layer perceptron neural network. Frontiers in Water, 2, 573034. https://doi.org/10.3389/frwa.2020.573034

  • Samani S (2021) Analyzing the groundwater resources sustainability management plan in Iran through comparative studies. Groundw Sustain Dev 12:100521

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Samani S, Moghaddam AA, Ye M (2018) Investigating the effect of complexity on groundwater flow modeling uncertainty. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 32(3):643–659

  • Sanikhani H, Kisi O (2012) River flow estimation and forecasting by using two different adaptive neuro-fuzzy approaches. Water Resour Manage 26(6):1715–1729

  • Shiri J, Kisi O (2011) Comparison of genetic programming with neuro-fuzzy systems for predicting short-term water table depth fluctuations. Comput Geosci 37(10):1692–1701

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shiri J, Kisi O, Yoon H, Kazemi MH, Shiri N, Poorrajabali M, Karimi S (2020) Prediction of groundwater level variations in coastal aquifers with tide and rainfall effects using heuristic data driven models. ISH J Hydraul Eng 1–1.

  • Suryanarayana C, Sudheer C, Mahammood V, Panigrahi BK (2014) An integrated wavelet-support vector machine for groundwater level prediction in Visakhapatnam, India. Neurocomputing 145:324–335

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suykens JA, Vandewalle J (1999) Least squares support vector machine classifiers. Neural Process Lett 9(3):293–300

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tayebi HA, Ghanei M, Aghajani K, Zohrevandi M (2019) Modeling of reactive orange 16 dye removal from aqueous media by mesoporous silica/crosslinked polymer hybrid using RBF, MLP and GMDH neural network models. J Mol Struct 1178:514–523

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vapnik V (1998) The support vector method of function estimation. In Nonlinear modeling (pp. 55-85). Springer, Boston, MA

  • Wen X, Feng Q, Deo RC, Wu M, Si J (2017) Wavelet analysis–artificial neural network conjunction models for multi-scale monthly groundwater level predicting in an arid inland river basin, northwestern China. Hydrol Res 48(6):1710–1729

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wunsch A, Liesch T, Broda S (2020) Groundwater level forecasting with artificial neural networks: a comparison of LSTM, CNN and NARX. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci Discuss 2020:1–23

    Google Scholar 

  • Zadeh LA (1995) Fuzzy sets. In Fuzzy sets, fuzzy logic, and fuzzy systems: selected papers by Lotfi A Zadeh (pp. 394–432)

  • Zare A, Bayat V, Daneshkare A (2011) Forecasting nitrate concentration in groundwater using artificial neural network and linear regression models. Int Agrophys 25(2)

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge the Qazvin Regional Water Authority for providing part of the data.

Funding

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

S.Smani and M. Vadiati analyzed and interpreted data and contributed to writing the manuscript. E.Zamani and Farahnaz Azizi collected data and contributed to drafting manuscript preparation. O.Kisi was involved in revising the manuscript critically for important intellectual content. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Meysam Vadiati.

Ethics declarations

Ethics Approval

Not applicable because this article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects.

Consent to Participate

Not applicable.

Consent to Publish

We, the undersigned, give us consent to publish identifiable details, including text, figures, and tables in the water resource management journal.

Competing Interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Samani, S., Vadiati, M., Azizi, F. et al. Groundwater Level Simulation Using Soft Computing Methods with Emphasis on Major Meteorological Components. Water Resour Manage (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-022-03217-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-022-03217-x

Keywords

  • Soft computing
  • Groundwater level prediction
  • Hydrogeology
  • Meteorological components