Artificial intelligence approaches for spatial modeling of streambed hydraulic conductivity
Saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks) describes the water movement through saturated porous media. The hydraulic conductivity of streambed varies spatially owing to the variations in sediment distribution profiles all along the course of the stream. The artificial intelligence (AI) based spatial modeling schemes were instituted and tested to predict the spatial patterns of streambed hydraulic conductivity. The geographical coordinates (i.e., latitude and longitude) of the sampled locations from where the in situ hydraulic conductivity measurements were determined were used as model inputs to predict streambed Ks over spatial scale using artificial neural network (ANN), adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system (ANFIS) and support vector machine (SVM) paradigms. The statistical measures computed by using the actual versus predicted streambed Ks values of individual models were comparatively evaluated. The AI-based spatial models provided superior spatial Ks prediction efficiencies with respect to both the strategies/schemes considered. The model efficiencies of spatial modeling scheme 1 (i.e., Strategy 1) were better compared to Strategy 2 due to the incorporation of more number of sampling points for model training. For instance, the SVM model with NSE = 0.941 (Strategy 1) and NSE = 0.895 (Strategy 2) were the best among all the models for 2016 data. Based on the scatter plots and Taylor diagrams plotted, the SVM model predictions were found to be much efficient even though, the ANFIS predictions were less biased. Although ANN and ANFIS models provided a satisfactory level of predictions, the SVM model provided virtuous streambed Ks patterns owing to its inherent capability to adapt to input data that are non-monotone and nonlinearly separable. The tuning of SVM parameters via 3D grid search was responsible for higher efficiencies of SVM models.
KeywordsANN ANFIS Spatial modeling Streambed hydraulic conductivity SVM Vented dams
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.
- Forkuor G, Hounkpatin OKL, Welp G, Thiel M (2017) High resolution mapping of soil properties using remote sensing variables in south-western Burkina Faso: a comparison of machine learning and multiple linear regression models. PLoS One 12:e0170478. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0170478 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Ghorbani H, Kashi H, Hafezi Moghadas N, Emamgholizadeh S (2015) Estimation of soil cation exchange capacity using multiple regression, artificial neural networks, and adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system models in Golestan Province. Iran. Commun Soil Sci Plant Anal 46:763–780. https://doi.org/10.1080/00103624.2015.1006367 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Jang J-SR (1992) Neuro-fuzzy modeling: architectures, analyses, and applications. University of California, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
- Jang J-SR, Sun C-T, Mizutani E (1997) Neuro-fuzzy and soft computing: a computational approach to learning and machine intelligence. Prentice Hall, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
- Reid CE, Jerrett M, Petersen ML, Pfister GG, Morefield PE, Tager IB, Raffuse SM, Balmes JR (2015) Spatiotemporal prediction of fine particulate matter during the 2008 Northern California wildfires using machine learning. Environ Sci Technol 49:3887–3896. https://doi.org/10.1021/es505846r CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Sivanandam S, Paulraj M (2009) Introduction to artificial neural networks. Vikas Publishing House, New DelhiGoogle Scholar