Skip to main content
Log in

Impact of training data size on the LSTM performances for rainfall–runoff modeling

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Modeling Earth Systems and Environment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

For predicting catchment runoff with data-driven methods, a long historical database of measurements is required. The current study focuses on the assessment of a deep learning model named long short-term memory (LSTM) for rainfall–runoff relationship with different training data size. The developed model has been evaluated on twenty catchments with diverse hydrological conditions obtained from the freely available CAMELS dataset. In order to prove the efficiency of the proposed model for runoff prediction, we test its performances against the traditional feed-forward neural network model. The studied models have been trained with the same input parameters and different size of training data to show the effect of data length on the prediction performances. To this end, the length of training data was varied from 3 to 15 years, while the model was tested on 10 years of data. The results show that the deep LSTM outperforms the traditional model in terms of statistical indicators over different size of training sets. The proposed deep LSTM model can predict runoff with acceptable performances using 9 years of data length in the training procedure, a result that improves when using 12 years. In addition, it has been proven that the deep LSTM model may be efficient even when using small data size (3 years) compared to its benchmarked model which require 9 years for similar results. Thus, the LSTM network is a powerful deep learning model able to learn the behavior of rainfall–runoff relationship with a minimum data length.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Addor N, Nearing G, Prieto C, Newman AJ, Le Vine N, Clark MP (2018) Selection of hydrological signatures for large-sample hydrology. Earth arXiv: 12 Feb 2018 Web

  • Aggarwal CC (2018) Neural networks and deep learning. Springer 10:978–983

    Google Scholar 

  • Anctil F, Perrin C, Andréassian V (2004) Impact of the length of observed records on the performance of ANN and of conceptual parsimonious rainfall–runoff forecasting models. Environ Model Softw 19:357–368

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ayzel G (2019) Does deep learning advance hourly runoff predictions? In: Sergey I Smagin, Alexander A Zatsarinnyy (eds): 5th International conference information technologies and high-performance computing (ITHPC-2019), Khabarovsk, Russia: CEUR Workshop Proceedings

  • Biondi D, Freni G, Iacobellis V, Mascaro G, Montanari A (2012) Validation of hydrological models: conceptual basis, methodological approaches and a proposal for a code of practice. Phys Chem Earth Parts A/B/C 42:70–76

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brath A, Montanari A, Toth E (2004) Analysis of the effects of different scenarios of historical data availability on the calibration of a spatially-distributed hydrological model. J Hydrol 291:232–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen SM, Wang YM, Tsou I (2013) Using artificial neural network approach for modelling rainfall–runoff due to typhoon. J Earth Syst Sci 122:399–405

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen J, Zeng G-Q, Zhou W, Du W, Lu KD (2018) Wind speed forecasting using nonlinear-learning ensemble of deep learning time series prediction and extremal optimization. Energy Convers Manag 165:681–695

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gebremichael M, Hossain F (2010) Satellite rainfall applications for surface hydrology. Springer, Berlin

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ghimire S, Deo RC, Raj N, Mi J (2019) Deep solar radiation forecasting with convolutional neural network and long short-term memory network algorithms. Appl Energy 253:113541

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graves A, Mohamed A-R, Hinton G (2013) Speech recognition with deep recurrent neural networks. In: 2013 IEEE international conference on acoustics, speech and signal processing. IEEE, pp 6645–6649

  • Guermoui M, Rabehi A, Benkaciali S, Djafer D (2016) Daily global solar radiation modelling using multi-layer perceptron neural networks in semi-arid region. Leonardo Electron J Pract Technol 28:35–46

    Google Scholar 

  • Gupta VK, Sorooshian S (1985a) The automatic calibration of conceptual catchment models using derivative-based optimization algorithms. Water Resour Res 21:473–485

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gupta VK, Sorooshian S (1985b) The relationship between data and the precision of parameter estimates of hydrologic models. J Hydrol 81:57–77

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hochreiter S, Schmidhuber J (1997) Long short-term memory. Neural Comput 9:1735–1780

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hong Y, Zhang Y, Khan SI (2016) Hydrologic remote sensing: capacity building for sustainability and resilience. CRC Press, Boca Raton

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hu C, Wu Q, Li H, Jian S, Li N, Lou Z (2018) Deep learning with a long short-term memory networks approach for rainfall–runoff simulation. Water 10:1543

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jeong DI, Kim YO (2005) Rainfall–runoff models using artificial neural networks for ensemble streamflow prediction. Hydrol Process Int J 19:3819–3835

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jimeno-Sáez P, Senent-Aparicio J, Pérez-Sánchez J, Pulido-Velazquez D (2018) A comparison of SWAT and ANN models for daily runoff simulation in different climatic zones of Peninsular Spain. Water 10:192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kingma DP, Ba J (2014) Adam: a method for stochastic optimization. arXiv:1412.6980

  • Kratzert F, Klotz D, Brenner C, Schulz K, Herrnegger M (2018) Rainfall–runoff modelling using long short-term memory (LSTM) networks. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 22:6005–6022

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levenberg K (1944) A method for the solution of certain non-linear problems in least squares. Q Appl Math 2:164–168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marquardt DW (1963) An algorithm for least-squares estimation of nonlinear parameters. J Soci Ind Appl Math 11:431–441

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merz R, Parajka J, Blöschl G (2009) Scale effects in conceptual hydrological modeling. Water Resour Res 45:W09405

    Google Scholar 

  • Moriasi DN, Arnold JG, Van Liew MW, Bingner RL, Harmel RD, Veith TL (2007) Model evaluation guidelines for systematic quantification of accuracy in watershed simulations. Trans ASABE 50:885–900

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newman AJ et al (2015) Development of a large-sample watershed-scale hydrometeorological data set for the contiguous USA: data set characteristics and assessment of regional variability in hydrologic model performance. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 19:209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Panda RK, Pramanik N, Bala B (2010) Simulation of river stage using artificial neural network and MIKE 11 hydrodynamic model. Comput Geosci 36:735–745

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perrin C, Oudin L, Andreassian V, Rojas-Serna C, Michel C, Mathevet T (2007) Impact of limited streamflow data on the efficiency and the parameters of rainfall–runoff models. Hydrol Sci J 52:131–151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Remesan R, Mathew J (2015) Hydroinformatics and data-based modelling issues in hydrology. In: Hydrological data driven modelling. Springer, pp 19–39

  • Ruder S (2016) An overview of gradient descent optimization algorithms. arXiv:1609.04747

  • Solaimani K (2009) Rainfall-runoff prediction based on artificial neural network (a case study: Jarahi watershed). Am–Eurasian J Agric Environ Sci 5:856–865

    Google Scholar 

  • Srivastava S, Lessmann S (2018) A comparative study of LSTM neural networks in forecasting day-ahead global horizontal irradiance with satellite data. Sol Energy 162:232–247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thornton PE, Thornton MM, Mayer BW, Wilhelmi N, Wei Y, Devarakonda R, Cook R (2012) Daymet: daily surface weather on a 1 km grid for North America, 1980–2008. Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) Distributed Active Archive Center for Biogeochemical Dynamics (DAAC)

  • Tokar AS, Johnson PA (1999) Rainfall–runoff modeling using artificial neural networks. J Hydrol Eng 4:232–239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang H, Yang Z, Yu Q, Hong T, Lin X (2018) Online reliability time series prediction via convolutional neural network and long short term memory for service-oriented systems. Knowl Based Syst 159:132–147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wöllmer M, Kaiser M, Eyben F, Schuller B, Rigoll G (2013) LSTM-modeling of continuous emotions in an audiovisual affect recognition framework. Image Vis Comput 31:153–163

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was developed with the support of the Directorate General for Scientific Research and Technological Development DGRSTD in addition of the PRFU-MESRS Project (Code# A17N01UN230120180001).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to T. Boulmaiz.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have 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

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Boulmaiz, T., Guermoui, M. & Boutaghane, H. Impact of training data size on the LSTM performances for rainfall–runoff modeling. Model. Earth Syst. Environ. 6, 2153–2164 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40808-020-00830-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40808-020-00830-w

Keywords

Navigation