Advances in geosciences · 2018 · 97 citations · 30 references
Natural ResourcesEarth SciencesHydrologyForecastingHydrologic ForecastingTime Series AnalysisEnsemble ForecastingHydrologic Time Series AnalysisHydrometeorological ForecastingStreamflow ForecastingStreamflow PredictionTime Series ForecastingHydrologic Ensemble ForecastingHydrologic Time Series ForecastingLinear RegressionMachine Learning-based Hydrologic ForecastingMultiple RegressionNaïve ForecastingRandom ForestsStreamflow Predictability
Abstract. We assess the performance of random forests and Prophet in forecasting daily streamflow up to seven days ahead in a river in the US. Both the assessed forecasting methods use past streamflow observations, while random forests additionally use past precipitation information. For benchmarking purposes we also implement a naïve method based on the previous streamflow observation, as well as a multiple linear regression model utilizing the same information as random forests. Our aim is to illustrate important points about the forecasting methods when implemented for the examined problem. Therefore, the assessment is made in detail at a sufficient number of starting points and for several forecast horizons. The results suggest that random forests perform better in general terms, while Prophet outperforms the naïve method for forecast horizons longer than three days. Finally, random forests forecast the abrupt streamflow fluctuations more satisfactorily than the three other methods.
30
Leo Breiman · Machine Learning · 2001 · 126.2K citations · Full text
Gérard Biau, Erwan Scornet · Test · 2016 · 3.9K citations · Full text
Sean J. Taylor, Benjamin Letham · The American Statistician · 2017 · 2.3K citations