Modified Response-Surface Method: New Approach for Modeling Pan Evaporation
Publication: Journal of Hydrologic Engineering
Volume 22, Issue 10
Abstract
This paper modifies the response surface method (RSM) by combining the polynomial and exponential basic mathematical functions to improve the accuracies for modeling monthly pan evaporations. The hybrid response surface function (HRSF) is developed based on exponential approximation and second-order polynomial estimation using the normalized input data set that includes temperature, relative humidity, wind speed, and solar radiation to predict pan evaporations of the Siirt and Diyarbakir stations in Turkey. A novel sensitivity analysis is proposed to obtain the effects of input databases on pan evaporation. According to the sensitivity analysis, the temperature and solar radiation are found to be the most effective parameters on pan evaporation. The performance of HRSF is compared with second-order response surface function, adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system (ANFIS), and M5 model tree (M5Tree) models in three different applications. The optimal predictions are evaluated based on different training and test data sets for each approach. In the first application, monthly pan evaporations of Siirt and Diyarbakir are separately estimated. At Siirt Station, HRSF models are found to be better than the RSM, ANFIS, and M5Tree models in almost all the selected data sets. In Diyarbakir, the HRSF and ANFIS models provide almost the same accuracy and they are found to be slightly better than the RSM for all the calibration cases. In the second application, the most sensitive two climatic input variables (temperature and solar radiation) of Siirt and Diyarbakir stations are separately used for approximate pan evaporation. The HRSF and RSM give better estimates than the ANFIS and M5Tree models in cases of limited climatic inputs. In the third application, Diyarbakir’s monthly pan evaporations are estimated using climatic data from Siirt or both Siirt and Diyarbakir stations. In all applications, the HRSF generally performs superior to the RSF, ANFIS, and M5Tree models, while the worst results are generally obtained from the M5Tree model. The accuracy of the models generally increases by increasing number of training data. The ANFIS and M5Tree are found to be more sensitive to training data length than the RSF and HRSF.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
Ay, M., and Kisi, O. (2014). “Modelling of chemical oxygen demand by using ANNs, ANFIS and k-means clustering techniques.” J. Hydrol., 511(1), 279–289.
Box, G. E., and Wilson, K. B. (1951). “On the experimental attainment of optimum conditions.” J. R. Stat. Soc., 13(1), 1–45.
Bruton, J. M., McClendon, R. W., and Hoogenboom, G. (2000). “Estimating daily pan evaporation with artificial neural networks.” Trans. ASAE, 43(2), 491–496.
Chakraborty, S., and Sen, A. (2014). “Adaptive response surface based efficient finite element model updating.” Finite Elem. Anal. Des., 80(1), 33–40.
Chang, F.-J., and Tsai, M.-J., (2016). “A nonlinear spatio-temporal lumping of radar rainfall for modeling multi-step-ahead inflow forecasts by data-driven techniques.” J. Hydrol., 535(1), 256–269.
Coulomb, C. V., Legessea, D., Gassea, F., Travic, Y., and Chernetd, T. (2001). “Lake evaporation estimates in tropical Africa (Lake Ziway, Ethiopia).” Hydrol. Processes, 245(1–4), 1–18.
Daren, H. R., and Smith, P. K. (2007). “Consideration of measurement uncertainty in the evaluation of goodness-of-fit in hydrologic and water quality modeling.” J. Hydrol., 337(3), 326–336.
De Martonne, E. (1926). “Une nouvelle fonction climatologique: L’indice d’aridité.” La Meteorologie, 2(1), 449–458.
DOĞAN, E., IŞIK, S., and Sandalci, M. (2007). “Estimation of daily evaporation using artificial neural networks.” Teknik Dergi, 18(2), 4119–4131.
Edwards, I. M., and Jutan, A. (1997). “Optimization and control using response surface methods.” Comput. Chem. Eng., 21(4), 441–453.
Etemad-Shahidi, A., and Mahjoobi, J. (2009). “Comparison between M5’ model tree and neural networks for prediction of significant wave height in Lake Superior.” Ocean Eng., 36(15), 1175–1181.
Gavin, H., and Agnew, C. A. (2004). “Modelling actual, reference and equilibrium evaporation from a temperate wet grassland.” Hydrol. Processes, 18(2), 229–246.
Jang, J.-S. R. (1993). “ANFIS: Adaptive-network-based fuzzy inference system.” IEEE Trans. Sys. Manage. Cybern., 23(3), 665–685.
Jang, J.-S. R., Sun, C.-T., and Mizutani, E. (1997). Neuro-fuzzy and soft computing: A computational approach to learning and machine intelligence, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Jiang, S.-H., Li, D.-Q., Zhou, C.-B., and Zhang, L.-M. (2014). “Capabilities of stochastic response surface method and response surface method in reliability analysis.” Struct. Eng. Mech., 49(1), 111–128.
Kang, S. C., Koh, H. M., and Choo, J. F. (2010). “An efficient response surface method using moving least squares approximation for structural reliability analysis.” Probab. Eng. Mech., 25(4), 365–371.
Kaymaz, I., and McMahon, C. A. (2005). “A response surface method based on weighted regression for structural reliability analysis.” Probab. Eng. Mech., 20(1), 11–17.
Keshtegar, B., Allawi, M. F., Afan, H. A., and El-Shafie, A. (2016a). “Optimized river stream-flow forecasting model utilizing high-order response surface method.” Water Res. Manage., 30(11), 3899–3914.
Keshtegar, B., and Heddam, S. (2017). “Modeling daily dissolved oxygen concentration using modified response surface method and artificial neural network: A comparative study.” Neural Comput. Appl., 13(3), 1–12.
Keshtegar, B., Piri, J., and Kisi, O. (2016b). “A nonlinear mathematical modeling of daily pan evaporation based on conjugate gradient method.” Comput. Electron. Agric., 127(1), 120–130.
Keshtegar, B., Sadeghian, P., Gholampour, A., and Ozbakkaloglu, T. (2017). “Nonlinear modeling of ultimate strength and strain of FRP-confined concrete using chaos control method.” Compos. Struct., 163(1), 423–431.
Kisi, O. (2015). “Pan evaporation modeling using least square support vector machine, multivariate adaptive regression splines and M5 model tree.” J. Hydrol., 528(1), 312–320.
Kisi, O. (2016). “Modeling reference evapotranspiration using three different heuristic regression approaches.” Agric. Water Manage., 169(1), 162–172.
Kisi, O., and Kilic, Y. (2015). “An investigation on generalization ability of artificial neural networks and M5 model tree in modeling reference evapotranspiration.” Theor. Appl. Climatol., 3(126), 413–425.
Komuscu, A. U., Erkan, A., and Oz, S. (1998). “Possible impacts of climate change on soil moisture variability in the Southeast Anatolian Development Project (GAP) region: An analysis from agricultural drought perspective.” Clim. Change, 40(3–4), 519–545.
Lee, J., Ye, L., Landen, W. O., and Eitenmiller, R. R. (2000). “Optimization of an extraction procedure for the quantification of vitamin E in tomato and broccoli using response surface methodology.” J. Food Compos. Anal., 13(1), 45–57.
Malik, A., and Kumar, A. (2015). “Pan evaporation simulation based on daily meteorological data using soft computing techniques and multiple linear regression.” Water Resour. Manage., 29(6), 1859–1872.
MATLAB version 7 [Computer software]. MathWorks, Inc., Natick, MA.
Moghaddamnia, A., Gousheh, M. G., Piri, J., Amin, S., and Han, D. (2009). “Evaporation estimation using artificial neural networks and adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system techniques.” Adv. Water Res., 32(1), 88–97.
Most, T., and Bucher, C. (2005). “A moving least squares weighting function for the element-free Galerkin method which almost fulfills essential boundary conditions.” Struct. Eng. Mech., 21(3), 315–332.
Nourani, V., and Mousavi, S. (2016). “Spatiotemporal groundwater level modeling using hybrid artificial intelligence-meshless method.” J. Hydrol., 536(1), 10–25.
Öktem, H., Erzurumlu, T., and Kurtaran, H. (2005). “Application of response surface methodology in the optimization of cutting conditions for surface roughness.” J. Mater. Process. Technol., 170(1), 11–16.
Özgür, Y. (2014). “Comparative study of algorithms for response surface optimization.” Math. Comput. Appl., 19(1), 93–104.
Ozturk, F., and Apaydin, H. (1998). “Estimating pan evaporation from limited meteorological observations from Turkey.” Water Int., 23(3), 184–189.
Quinlan, J. R. (1992). “Learning with continuous classes.” Proc., 5th Australian Joint Conf. on Artificial Intelligence, World Scientific, Singapore, 343–348.
Rahimikhoob, A., Asadi, M., and Mashal, M. (2013). “A comparison between conventional and M5 model tree methods for converting pan evaporation to reference evapotranspiration for semi-arid region.” Water Res. Manage., 27(14), 4815–4826.
Ren, W. X., and Chen, H. B. (2010). “Finite element model updating in structural dynamics by using the response surface method.” Eng. Struct., 32(8), 2455–2465.
Sanikhani, H., Kisi, O., Nikpour, M. R., and Dinpashoh, Y. (2012). “Estimation of daily pan evaporation using two different adaptive neuro-fuzzy computing techniques.” Water Res. Manage., 26(15), 4347–4365.
Shiri, J., Dierickx, W., Baba, A. P.-A., Neamati, S., and Ghorbani, M. A. (2011). “Estimating daily pan evaporation from climatic data of the State of Illinois, USA using adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system (ANFIS) and artificial neural network (ANN).” Hydrol. Res., 42(6), 491–502.
Singh, K. K., Pal, M., and Singh, V. P. (2010). “Estimation of mean annual flood in Indian catchments using backpropagation neural network and M5 model tree.” Water Resour. Manage., 24(10), 2007–2019.
Wang, Y., and Witten, I. H. (1997). “Induction of model trees for predicting continuous lasses.” Proc., Poster Papers of the European Conf. on Machine Learning, Univ. of Economics, Faculty of Informatics and Statistics, Prague, Czech Republic.
Xiong, F., Liu, Y., Xiong, Y., and Yang, S. (2012). “A double weighted stochastic response surface method for reliability analysis.” J. Mech. Sci. Technol., 26(8), 2573–2580.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Hydrologic Engineering
Volume 22 • Issue 10 • October 2017
Copyright
© 2017 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Jun 1, 2016
Accepted: Mar 3, 2017
Published online: Aug 4, 2017
Published in print: Oct 1, 2017
Discussion open until: Jan 4, 2018
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.