Groundwater Level Forecasting Using Wavelet and Kriging

Document Type: Research Paper

Authors

1 Department of Civil Engineering, University of Qom, Qom, Iran.

2 Department of Water Resources Engineering, Faculty of Civil Engineering, University of Tabriz, Tabriz, Iran.

Abstract

In this research, a hybrid wavelet-artificial neural network (WANN) and a geostatistical method were proposed for spatiotemporal prediction of the groundwater level (GWL) for one month ahead. For this purpose, monthly observed time series of GWL were collected from September 2005 to April 2014 in 10 piezometers around Mashhad City in the Northeast of Iran. In temporal forecasting, an artificial neural network (ANN) and a WANN were trained for each piezometer. Kriging was used in spatial estimations. The comparison of the prediction accuracy of these two models illustrated that the WANN was more efficacious in prediction of GWL for one month ahead. Thereafter, in order to predict GWL in desired points in the study area, the kriging method was used and a Gaussian model was selected as the best variogram model. Ultimately, the WANN with coefficient of determination and root mean square error and mean absolute error, 0.836 and 0.335 and 0.273 respectively, in temporal forecasting and Gaussian model with root mean square, 0.253 as the best fitted model on Kriging method for spatial estimating were suitable choices for spatiotemporal GWL forecasting. The obtained map of groundwater level showed that the groundwater level was higher in the areas of plain located in mountainside areas. This fact can show that outcomes are respectively correct.

Keywords


  1. Rajaee, T., 2011. Wavelet and ANN combination model for prediction of daily suspended sediment load in rivers. Science of the Total Environment, 409: 2917–2928.
  2. Rajaee, T., Broumand, A., 2015. Forecasting of chlorophyll-a concentrations in South San Francisco Bay using five different models. Applied Ocean Research, 53: 208–217.
  3. Ravansalar, M., Rajaee, T., 2015. Evaluation of Wavelet Performance via an ANN-Based Electrical Conductivity Prediction model. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 187:366. DOI 10.1007/s10661-015-4590-7.
  4. Yang, Z.P., Lu, W.X., Long, Y.Q., Li, P., 2009. Application and comparison of two prediction models for groundwater levels: A case study in Western Jilin Province, China. Journal of Arid Environments, 73: 487–492.
  5. Shiri, J., Kisi, O., 2011. Comparison of genetic programming with neuro-fuzzy systems for predicting short-term water table depth fluctuations. Computers and Geosciences, 37: 1692-1701.
  6. Yoon, H., Jun, S., Hyun, Y., Bae, G., Lee, K., 2011. A comparative study of artificial neural networks and support vector machines for predicting groundwater levels in a coastal aquifer. Journal of Hydrology, 396: 128–138.
  7. Mohammadi, K., 2008. Groundwater table estimation using MODFLOW and artificial neural networks. Water Science and Technology Library 68, no. 2: 127-138.
  8. Nourani, V., Goli Ejlali, R, and Alami, M.T., 2011. Spatiotemporal Groundwater Level Forecasting in Coastal Aquifers by Hybrid Artificial Neural Network-Geostatistics Model: A Case Study. Environmental Engineering Science, 28(3): 217-228.
  9. Nakhaei, M., Saberi Nasr, A., 2012. A combined Wavelet- Artificial Neural Network model and its application to the prediction of groundwater level fluctuations. Geopersia, 2 (2): 77-91.
  10. Zhou, H.C., Peng, Y., Liang, G.H., 2008. The research of monthly discharge predictor-corrector model based on wavelet decomposition. Water ResourcesManagement, 22: 217–227.
  11. Kisi, O., 2010. Wavelet regression model for short-term streamflow forecasting. Journal of Hydrology 389: 344–353.
  12. Gemitzi, A., Stefanopoulos, K., 2011. Evaluation of the effects of climate and man intervention on ground waters and their dependent ecosystems using time series analysis. Journal of Hydrology 403: 130–140.
  13. Wang, W., Jin, J., Li, Y, 2009. Prediction of inflow at three gorges dam in Yangtze river with wavelet network model. Water Resources Management, 23: 2791–2083.
  14. Sahoo GB, Ray C, Mehnert E, Keefer DA., 2006. Application of artificial neural networks toassess pesticide contamination in shallow groundwater. Sci Total Environ, 367:234–51.
  15. Rajaee T, Mirbagheri SA, Zounemat-Kermani M, Nourani V., 2009. Daily suspended sedimentconcentration simulation using ANN and neuro-fuzzy models. Sci Total Environ, 407:4916–27.
  16. Tsai CH, Chang LC, Chiang HC., 2009.  Forecasting of ozone episode days by cost-sensitiveneural network methods. Sci Total Environ. 407:2124–35.
  17. Aziz, A.R.A., Wang, K.F.V., 1992. Neural networks approach the determination of aquifer parameter. Groundwater, 30(2): 164-166.
  18. Lallahem, S., Mania, J., Hani, A., Najjar, Y., 2005.On the use of neural networks to evaluate groundwater levels in fractured media. Journal of Hydrology, 307: 92–111.
  19. Daliakopoulos, I.N., Coulibaly, P., Tsanis, I.K., 2005. Groundwater level forecasting using artificial neural networks. Journal of Hydrology, 309: 229–240.
  20. Nourani, V., Mogaddam, A.A., and Nadiri, A., 2008. An ANNbasedmodel for spatiotemporal groundwater level forecasting.Hydrological Processes. 22 (26): 5054-5066.
  21. Sahoo, S., Jha, MK., 2013. Groundwater-level prediction using multiple linear regression and artificial neural network techniques: a comparative assessment. Hydrogeology Journal. 21(8): 1865-1887.
  22. Maiti, S., Tiwari, R. K., 2014. A comparative study of artificial neural networks, Bayesian neural networks and adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system in groundwater level prediction. Environmental Earth Sciences. 71(7): 3147-3160.
  23. Pasquini A, Depetris P., 2007. Discharge trends and flow dynamics of South American riversdraining the southern Atlantic seaboard: an overview. Journal of Hydrology, 333:385–99.
  24. Rajaee T., 2010. Wavelet and neuro-fuzzy conjunction approach for suspended sediment prediction. Clean-Soli, Air, Water, 38(3):275–86.
  25. Shoaib M, Shamseldin A.Y, Melville B.W., 2014. Comparative study of different wavelet based neural network models for rainfall–runoff modeling. Journal of Hydrology, 515: 47–58.
  26. Nourani V, HosseiniBaghanam A, Adamowski J, Kisi O., 2014. Applications of hybrid wavelet–Artificial Intelligence models in hydrology: A review. Journal of Hydrology, 514: 358–377.
  27. Adamowski, J., Chan, H.F., 2011. A wavelet neural network conjunction model for groundwater level forecasting. Journal of Hydrology, 407: 28–40.
  28. Nourani, V., Alami, M., Aminfar, M., 2009.A combined neural-wavelet model for prediction of Ligvanchai watershed precipitation.Engineering applications of Artificial Intelligence, 22: 466–472.
  29. Rouhani, Sh., & Meyers, D. E.,1990. Problems in space-timekriging of geohydrological data. Mathematical Geology,22:611–623.
  30. Reghunath, R., Sreedhara Murthy, T. R., & Raghavan, B. R., 2005. Time series analysis to monitor and assess waterresources: A moving average approach. EnvironmentalMonitoring and Assessment, 109:65–72.
  31. Kumar, S., Sondhi, S. K., &Phogat, V., 2005. Network designfor groundwater level monitoring in upper Bari Doab canaltract, Punjab, India. Irrigation and Drainage, 54:431–442.
  32. Abedian H, Mohammadi K, Rafiee R., 2013. Optimizing monitoring network of water table by geostatistical methods. Journal of Geology and Mining Research, 5(9): 223-231.
  33. Kholghi M, Hosseini S.M., 2009. Comparison of Groundwater Level Estimation Using Neuro-fuzzy and Ordinary Kriging. Environmental Modelling& Assessment, 14(6): 729-737.
  34. Altun H, Bilgil A, FidanBC.,2007. Treatment of multi-dimensional data to enhance neuralnetwork estimators in regression problems. Expert SystAppl, 32(2):599–605.
  35. McCulloch WS, Pitts WH., 1943. A logical calculus of the ideas immanent in neural nets. BullMathBiophys, 5:115–33.
  36. Rumelhart, D.E., and McClelland, J.L., 1986. Parallel DistributedProcessing: Explorations in the Microstructure of Cognition, I andIi. Cambridge: MIT Press.
  37. Haykin S., 1999. Neural network — a comprehensive foundation. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice-Hall.
  38. Masters T., 1993. Practical neural network recipes in C++. San Diego (CA): Academic Press.
  39. Hsu, K.C., Li, S.T., 2010. Clustering spatial–temporal precipitation data using wavelet transform and self-organizing map neural network. Advances in Water Resources 33: 190-200.
  40. Cohen A, Kovacevic J., 1996. Wavelets: the mathematical background. Proc IEEE, 84(4):514–22.
  41. Gupta KK, Gupta R., 2007.Despeckle and geographical feature extraction in SAR images bywavelet transform. ISPRS J Photogramm, 62(6):473–84.
  42. Einax JW, Soldt U., 1999. Geostatistical and multivariate statisticalmethods for the assessment of polluted soils-merits and limitations.Chemom. Intell. Lab. Syst, 46: 79-91.
  43. Isaaks, E.H., and Srivastava, R.M., 1989. Applied Geostatistics.New York: Oxford University Press.
  44. Kitanidis, P. K., 1997. Introduction to geostatistics: Application tohydrogeology. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  45. Legates DR, McCabe JrGJ., 1999. Evaluating the use of goodness-of-fit measures in hydrologicandhydroclimatic model validation. Water Resour Res. 35(1):233–41.
  46. Nash, J.E., and Sutcliffe, J.V., 1970. River flow forecastingthrough conceptual models: part I. A conceptual models discussionof principles. J. Hydrol, 10, 282.
  47. Schmitz J. E, Zemp R. J, Mendes M.J., 2006. Artificial neural networks for the solution of the phasestability problem. Fluid Phase Equilib, 245:83–7.
  48. Mallat S.G.,1989. A theory for multi resolution signal decomposition: the waveletrepresentation. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell, 11(7):674–93.
  49. Abrahart RJ, See L., 2000. Comparing neural network (NN) and Auto Regressive MovingAverage (ARMA) techniques for the provision of continuous river flow forecasts intwo contrasting catchments. Hydrol Process, 14:2157–72.
  50. Wang, W., Ding, J., 2003.Wavelet network model and its application to the prediction of hydrology.Nature and Science, 1(1).