Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
First posted August 31, 2022 For additional information, contact: Program Coordinator, Water Availability and Use Science ProgramU.S. Geological Survey 12201 Sunrise Valley DriveReston, VA 20192Contact Pubs Warehouse Few regional or national scale studies have evaluated machine learning approaches for predicting streamflow metrics at ungaged locations. Most such studies are limited by the number of dimensions of the streamflow regime investigated. This study, in contrast, provides a comprehensive evaluation of the streamflow regime based on three widely available machine learning approaches (support vector regression, random forest, and cubist regression) and on multiple linear regression to predict 106 natural streamflow metrics at ungaged locations. This evaluation is done for 545 streamgages across the northwest United States for recurrence-interval flood metrics and for 1,851 sites in the conterminous United States for non-flood metrics. The results indicate that for flood metrics, predictions by cubist regression and support vector regressions have substantially less error than the other approaches. For all the remaining streamflow metrics, random forest models outperform the other methods.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Eng et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: