mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Enhancing predictive skills in physically-consistent way: Physics Informed Machine Learning for Hydrological Processes

arXiv 2104.11009 ↗First posted 22 Apr 2021stat.ML cs.LG stat.APcited by 6

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Current modeling approaches for hydrological modeling often rely on either physics-based or data-science methods, including Machine Learning (ML) algorithms. While physics-based models tend to rigid structure resulting in unrealistic parameter values in certain instances, ML algorithms establish the input-output relationship while ignoring the constraints imposed by well-known physical processes. While there is a notion that the physics model enables better process understanding and ML algorithms exhibit better predictive skills, scientific knowledge that does not add to predictive ability may be deceptive. Hence, there is a need for a hybrid modeling approach to couple ML algorithms and physics-based models in a synergistic manner. Here we develop a Physics Informed Machine Learning (PIML) model that combines the process understanding of conceptual hydrological model with predictive abilities of state-of-the-art ML models. We apply the proposed model to predict the monthly time series of the target (streamflow) and intermediate variables (actual evapotranspiration) in the Narmada river basin in India. Our results show the capability of the PIML model to outperform a purely conceptual model (abcd model) and ML algorithms while ensuring the physical consistency in outputs validated through water balance analysis. The systematic approach for combining conceptual model structure with ML algorithms could be used to improve the predictive accuracy of crucial hydrological processes important for flood risk assessment.

Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 12 of its 95 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 22 Apr 2021.

Builds on

12 of 95 references.

References · 12

  1. 2015Dropout as a Bayesian Approximation: Representing Model Uncertainty in Deep Learningcited by 4,416
  2. 2018Explaining Explanations: An Overview of Interpretability of Machine Learningcited by 508
  3. 2020pymoo: Multi-objective Optimization in Pythoncited by 196
  4. 2015A Theoretically Grounded Application of Dropout in Recurrent Neural Networkscited by 161
  5. 2020Integrating Scientific Knowledge with Machine Learning for Engineering and Environmental Systemscited by 160
  6. 2017Physics-guided Neural Networks (PGNN): An Application in Lake Temperature Modelingcited by 130
  7. 2018Physics Guided RNNs for Modeling Dynamical Systems: A Case Study in Simulating Lake Temperature Profilescited by 55
  8. 2019Physics-guided Convolutional Neural Network (PhyCNN) for Data-driven Seismic Response Modelingcited by 40
  9. 2019Enhancing streamflow forecast and extracting insights using long-short term memory networks with data integration at continental scalescited by 27
  10. 2020Physics Guided Machine Learning Methods for Hydrologycited by 17
  11. 2020Uncertainty Estimation with Deep Learning for Rainfall-Runoff Modellingcited by 9
  12. 2019Physics-guided Design and Learning of Neural Networks for Predicting Drag Force on Particle Suspensions in Moving Fluidscited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2021: 2; 2022: 0; 2023: 1; 2024: 1; 2025: 1; 2026: 1.

6 papers.