STREAMFLOW SIMULATION: COMPARISON BETWEEN SOIL WATER ASSESSMENT TOOL AND ARTIFICIAL NEURAL NETWORK MODELS
The present study compared the performance of two different models for streamflow simulation namely: Soil Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) and the Artificial Neural Network (ANN). During the calibration periods, the Nash-Sutcliff (NS) and Coefficient of Determination (R2) for SWAT was 0.74 and 0.81 respectively, whereas for ANN, it was 0.99 and 0.85 respectively. The ANN performs better during the validation period as the result revealed with NS and R2 having 0.98 and 0.89 respectively, while for the SWAT model it was 0.71 and 0.74 respectively. Based on the recommended comparison of graphical and statistical evaluation performances of both models, the ANN model performed better in estimating peak flow events than the SWAT model in the Upper Betwa Basin. Furthermore, the rigorous time required and expertise for calibration of the SWAT is much less as compared with the ANN. Moreover, the results obtained from both models demonstrate the performances of the
Arnold, J. G., Srinivasan, R., Muttiah, R. R., & Williams, J. R. (1998). Large area hydrological modelling and assessment part 1: model development. J. Am. Water Resources. Assoc., 73-89.
Ayyar, N. P. (2015,823). Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved from http://www.britannica.com/place/Madhya-Pradesh
Carpenter, T. M., Georgakakos, K. P., & Sperfslage, J. A. (2001). On the parametric and NEXRAD-radar sensitivities of a distributed hydrologic model suitable for operational use. Journal of Hydrology, 169-193. change on the hydrology of a rural. Journal of Hydrology,97-109
Dawson, C. W., & Wilby, R. L. (2001). Hydrological modelling using artificial networks. Progress in Physical Geography, 80-108
Demirel, M., Venancio, A., & Kahya, E. (2009). Flow forecast by SWAT model and ANN in Pracana basin, Portugal. Advances in Engineering Software, 467-473.
Lohani, A. K., Kumar, R., & Singh, R. D. (2012). Hydrological time series modeling: A comparison between adaptive neuro-fuzzy, neural network and autoregressive techniques. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2012.03.031
Moradkhani, H., & Sorooshian, S. (2008). General Review of Rainfall-Runoff Modeling: Model Calibration, Data Assimilation, and Uncertainty Analysis. In S. Sorooshian, K.-L. Hsu, E. Coppola, B. Tomassetti, M. Verdecchia, & G. Visconti (Eds.), Hydrological Modelling and the Water Cycle (Vol. 63, pp. 1–24). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-77843-1_1
Moriasi, D. N., Arnold, J. G., Van Liew, M. W., Bingner, R. L., Harmel, R. D., & Veith, T. L. (2007). Model Evaluations Guidelines for Systematics Quantification of Accuracy in Watershed Simulations. T. ASABE, pp. 885-900.
Morid, S., Gosain, A. K., & Keshari, A. K. (2002). Solar Radiation Estimation using Temperature- based, Stochastic and Artificial Neural Networks Approaches. Hydrology Research, 33(4), 291–304. https://doi.org/10.2166/nh.2002.0009
Nayak, P. C., Sudheer, K. P., Rangan, D. M., & Ramasastri, K. S. (2005). Short-term flood forecasting with a neurofuzzy model. Water Resources Research, 41 2517-2530.
Nayak, P. C., Sudheer, K. P., Rangan, D. M., & Ramasastri, K. S. (2004). A neuro-fuzzy computing technique for modeling hydrological time series. Journal of Hydrology, 291(1– 2), 52–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2003.12.010
Neitsch, S. L., Arnold, J. G., Kiniry, J. R., & Williams, J. R. (2009). Soil and Water Assessment Tool Theoretical Documentation Version 2009. Texas: Grassland, Soil and Water Research Laboratory, Blackland Research Center.Watershed Hydrology. Water Resources Publications, 809-846.
Niedda, M., Pirastru, M., Castellini, M., & Giadrossich, F. (2014). Simulating the Hydrological Response of a Closed Catchment-lake System to Recent Climate and Land-use Changes in Semi-arid Mediterranean Environment. Journal of Hydrology, 732-745.
Ozturk, M., Copty, N. K., & Saysel, A. K. (2013). Modeling the impact of land use change on the hydrology of a rural. Journal of Hydrology, 97-109
Palazzoli, I., Maskey, S., Uhlenbrook, S., Nana, E., & Bocchiola, D. (2015). Impact of prospective climate change on water resources and crop yields in the Indrawati basin, Nepal. AgriculturalSystems,133,143–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2014.10.016
Rajurkar, M. P., Kothyari, U. C., & Chaube, U. C. (2004). Modeling of the daily rainfall- runoff relationship with artiﬁcial neural network. Journal of Hydrology, 18.
Refsgaard, J. C., & Storm, B. (1995). MIKE SHE In: Singh, V.P., (Ed.), Computer Models SCS. (1972). Section 4: Hydrology in National Engineering Handbook.
Shen, C., & Phanikumar, M. S. (2010). A process-based, distributed hydrologic model based on a large-scale method for surface–subsurface coupling. Advances in Water Resources, 33,1524–1541
Sivakumar, B., & Berndtsson, R. (2010). Advances in Data-Based Approaches for Hydrologic Modelling and Forecasting. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd.
Sjoberg, J. (2005). Mathemetica Neural Networks ''Train and Analyze Neural Networks To Fit Your Data''. Illinois: Wolfram Research Inc.
Tokar, A., & Johnson, P. (n.d.). Rainfall-Runoff Modeling Using Artificial Neural Networks. 8. Vaze, J., Jordan, P., Beecham, R., Frost, A., & Summerell, G. (2012). Guidelines for rainfall-runoff modelling: Towards best practice model application. eWater Cooperative Research Centre.
Vaze, J., Jordan, P., Beecham, R., Frost, A., & Summerell, G. (2012). Guidelines for rainfall-runoff modelling: Towards best practice model application. eWater Cooperative Research Centre.
Wang, W., Van Gelder, P. H., Vrijling, J. K., & Ma, J. (2006). Forecasting daily streamflow using hybrid ANN models. Journal of Hydrology, 383-399.
Copyright (c) 2021 FUDMA JOURNAL OF SCIENCES
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
FUDMA Journal of Sciences