Articles | Volume 29, issue 24
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-7217-2025
© Author(s) 2025. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-7217-2025
© Author(s) 2025. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
An explainable deep learning model based on hydrological principles for flood simulation and forecasting
Xin Xiang
State Key Laboratory of Water Resources Engineering and Management, Wuhan University, Wuhan, 430072, China
State Key Laboratory of Water Resources Engineering and Management, Wuhan University, Wuhan, 430072, China
Chenglong Li
State Key Laboratory of Water Resources Engineering and Management, Wuhan University, Wuhan, 430072, China
Yun Wang
Water Resources Technical College, Wuhan, 430072, China
Related authors
No articles found.
Jiaoyang Wang, Dedi Liu, Shenglian Guo, Lihua Xiong, Pan Liu, Hua Chen, Jie Chen, Jiabo Yin, and Yuling Zhang
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 29, 3315–3339, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-3315-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-3315-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The unclear feedback loops of water supply–hydropower generation–environmental conservation (SHE) nexuses with inter-basin water diversion projects (IWDPs) increase the uncertainty in the rational scheduling of water resources for water receiving and water donation areas. To address the different impacts of IWDPs on dynamic SHE nexuses and explore synergies, a framework is proposed to identify these effects across the different temporal and spatial scales in a reservoir group.
Zhen Cui, Shenglian Guo, Hua Chen, Dedi Liu, Yanlai Zhou, and Chong-Yu Xu
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 2809–2829, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-2809-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-2809-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Ensemble forecasting facilitates reliable flood forecasting and warning. This study couples the copula-based hydrologic uncertainty processor (CHUP) with Bayesian model averaging (BMA) and proposes the novel CHUP-BMA method of reducing inflow forecasting uncertainty of the Three Gorges Reservoir. The CHUP-BMA avoids the normal distribution assumption in the HUP-BMA and considers the constraint of initial conditions, which can improve the deterministic and probabilistic forecast performance.
Jinghua Xiong, Shenglian Guo, Abhishek, Jiabo Yin, Chongyu Xu, Jun Wang, and Jing Guo
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 1873–1895, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-1873-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-1873-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Temporal variability and spatial heterogeneity of climate systems challenge accurate estimation of probable maximum precipitation (PMP) in China. We use high-resolution precipitation data and climate models to explore the variability, trends, and shifts of PMP under climate change. Validated with multi-source estimations, our observations and simulations show significant spatiotemporal divergence of PMP over the country, which is projected to amplify in future due to land–atmosphere coupling.
Jinghua Xiong, Abhishek, Li Xu, Hrishikesh A. Chandanpurkar, James S. Famiglietti, Chong Zhang, Gionata Ghiggi, Shenglian Guo, Yun Pan, and Bramha Dutt Vishwakarma
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 15, 4571–4597, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-4571-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-4571-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
To overcome the shortcomings associated with limited spatiotemporal coverage, input data quality, and model simplifications in prevailing evaporation (ET) estimates, we developed an ensemble of 4669 unique terrestrial ET subsets using an independent mass balance approach. Long-term mean annual ET is within 500–600 mm yr−1 with a unimodal seasonal cycle and several piecewise trends during 2002–2021. The uncertainty-constrained results underpin the notion of increasing ET in a warming climate.
Jinghua Xiong, Shenglian Guo, Abhishek, Jie Chen, and Jiabo Yin
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 6457–6476, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-6457-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-6457-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Although the "dry gets drier, and wet gets wetter (DDWW)" paradigm is prevalent in summarizing wetting and drying trends, we show that only 11.01 %–40.84 % of the global land confirms and 10.21 %–35.43 % contradicts the paradigm during 1985–2014 from a terrestrial water storage change perspective. Similar proportions that intensify with the increasing emission scenarios persist until the end of the 21st century. Findings benefit understanding of global hydrological responses to climate change.
Jing Tian, Zhengke Pan, Shenglian Guo, Jiabo Yin, Yanlai Zhou, and Jun Wang
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 4853–4874, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-4853-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-4853-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Most of the literature has focused on the runoff response to climate change, while neglecting the impacts of the potential variation in the active catchment water storage capacity (ACWSC) that plays an essential role in the transfer of climate inputs to the catchment runoff. This study aims to systematically identify the response of the ACWSC to a long-term meteorological drought and asymptotic climate change.
Yujie Zeng, Dedi Liu, Shenglian Guo, Lihua Xiong, Pan Liu, Jiabo Yin, and Zhenhui Wu
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 3965–3988, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-3965-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-3965-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
The sustainability of the water–energy–food (WEF) nexus remains challenge, as interactions between WEF and human sensitivity and water resource allocation in water systems are often neglected. We incorporated human sensitivity and water resource allocation into a WEF nexus and assessed their impacts on the integrated system. This study can contribute to understanding the interactions across the water–energy–food–society nexus and improving the efficiency of resource management.
Jinghua Xiong, Shenglian Guo, Jie Chen, and Jiabo Yin
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2021-645, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2021-645, 2022
Manuscript not accepted for further review
Short summary
Short summary
Although the “dry gets drier and wet gets wetter” (DDWW) paradigm is widely used to describe the trends in wetting and drying globally, we show that 27.1 % of global land agrees with the paradigm, while 22.4 % shows the opposite pattern during the period 1985–2014 from the perspective of terrestrial water storage change. Similar percentages are discovered under different scenarios during the future period. Our findings will benefit the understanding of hydrological responses under climate change.
Cited articles
Alizadeh, B., Ghaderi Bafti, A., Kamangir, H., Zhang, Y., Wright, D. B., and Franz, K. J.: A novel attention-based LSTM cell post-processor coupled with Bayesian optimization for streamflow prediction, J. Hydrol., 601, 126526, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2021.126526, 2021.
Bindas, T., Tsai, W., Liu, J., Rahmani, F., Feng, D., Bian, Y., Lawson, K., and Shen, C.: Improving river routing using a differentiable Muskingum-Cunge model and physics-informed machine learning, Water Resour. Res., 60, e2023WR035337, https://doi.org/10.1029/2023WR035337, 2024.
Boucher, M. A., Quilty, J., and Adamowski, J.: Data assimilation for streamflow forecasting using extreme learning machines and multilayer perceptrons, Water Resour. Res., 56, e2019WR026226, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019WR026226, 2020.
Chen, C., Jiang, J., Liao, Z., Zhou, Y., Wang, H., and Pei, Q.: A short-term flood prediction based on spatial deep learning network: A case study for Xi County, China, J. Hydrol., 607, 127535, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2022.127535, 2022.
Cheng, C., Zhao, M., Chau, K. W., and Wu, X.: Using genetic algorithm and TOPSIS for Xinanjiang model calibration with a single procedure, J. Hydrol., 316, 129–140, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2005.04.022, 2006.
Cho, K. and Kim, Y.: Improving streamflow prediction in the WRF-Hydro model with LSTM networks, J. Hydrol., 605, 127297, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2021.127297, 2022.
Cui, Z., Zhou, Y., Guo, S., Wang, J., Ba, H., and He, S.: A novel hybrid XAJ-LSTM model for multi-step-ahead flood forecasting, Hydrol. Res., 52, 1436–1454, https://doi.org/10.2166/nh.2021.016, 2021.
De la Fuente, L. A., Ehsani, M. R., Gupta, H. V., and Condon, L. E.: Toward interpretable LSTM-based modeling of hydrological systems, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 945–971, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-945-2024, 2024.
Feng, D., Liu, J., Lawson, K., and Shen, C.: Differentiable, learnable, regionalized process-based models with multiphysical outputs can approach state-ff-the-art hydrologic prediction accuracy, Water Resour. Res., 58, e2022WR032404, https://doi.org/10.1029/2022WR032404, 2022.
Feng, D., Beck, H., Lawson, K., and Shen, C.: The suitability of differentiable, physics-informed machine learning hydrologic models for ungauged regions and climate change impact assessment, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 27, 2357–2373, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-2357-2023, 2023.
Frame, J. M., Kratzert, F., Raney II, A., Rahman, M., Salas, F. R., and Nearing, G. S.: Post-processing the national water model with long short-term memory networks for streamflow predictions and model diagnostics, J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc., 57, 885–905, https://doi.org/10.1111/1752-1688.12964, 2021.
Frame, J. M., Kratzert, F., Gupta, H. V., Ullrich, P., and Nearing, G. S.: On strictly enforced mass conservation constraints for modelling the Rainfall-Runoff process, Hydrol. Process., 37, e14847, https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.14847, 2023.
Frank, E. S., Zhen, Y., Han, F., Shailesh, T., and Matthias, D.: An introductory review of deep learning for prediction models with big data, Front. Artif. Intell., 3, 4, https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2020.00004, 2020.
Guido, B. I., Popescu, I., Samadi, V., and Bhattacharya, B.: An integrated modeling approach to evaluate the impacts of nature-based solutions of flood mitigation across a small watershed in the southeast United States, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 23, 2663–2681, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-23-2663-2023, 2023.
Han, H. and Morrison, R. R.: Improved runoff forecasting performance through error predictions using a deep-learning approach, J. Hydrol., 608, 127653, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2022.127653, 2022.
He, L., Shi, L., Song, W., Shen, J., Wang, L., Hu, X., and Zha, Y.: Synergizing intuitive physics and big data in deep learning: Can we obtain process insights while maintaining state-ff-the-art hydrological prediction capability? Water Resour. Res., 60, e2024WR037582, https://doi.org/10.1029/2024WR037582, 2024.
Hirabayashi, Y., Mahendran, R., Koirala, S., Konoshima, L., Yamazaki, D., Watanabe, S., Kim, H., and Kanae, S.: Global flood risk under climate change, Nat. Clim. Chang., 3, 816–821, https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1911, 2013.
Hochreiter, S. and Schmidhuber, J.: Long short-term memory, Neural Comput., 9, 1735–1780, https://doi.org/10.1162/neco.1997.9.8.1735, 1997.
Hoedt, P. J., Kratzert, F., Klotz, D., Halmich, C., Holzleitner, M., Nearing, G., Hochreiter, S., and Klambauer, G.: MC-LSTM: Mass-conserving LSTM, in: Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, Proceedings of the 38th International Conference on Machine Learning, San Diego, Web of Science ID: WOS:000683104604027, https://proceedings.mlr.press/v139/hoedt21a.html (last access: 15 December 2025), 2021.
Jiang, S., Zheng, Y., and Solomatine, D.: Improving AI system awareness of geoscience knowledge: Symbiotic integration of physical approaches and deep learning, Geophys. Res. Lett., 47, e2020GL088229, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL088229, 2020.
La Follette, P. T., Teuling, A. J., Addor, N., Clark, M., Jansen, K., and Melsen, L. A.: Numerical daemons of hydrological models are summoned by extreme precipitation, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 5425–5446, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-5425-2021, 2021.
Li, H., Zhang, C., Chu, W., Shen, D., and Li, R.: A process-driven deep learning hydrological model for daily rainfall-runoff simulation, J. Hydrol., 637, 131434, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2024.131434, 2024.
Li, Z., Kan, G., Yao, C., Liu, Z., Li, Q., and Yu, S.: Improved neural network model and its application in hydrological simulation, J. Hydrol. Eng., 19, 04014019, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0000958, 2014.
Nash, J. E. and Sutcliffe, J. V.: River flow forecasting through conceptual models part I – A discussion of principles, J. Hydrol., 10, 282–290, https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1694(70)90255-6, 1970.
Nearing, G. S., Kratzert, F., Sampson, A. K., Pelissier, C. S., Klotz, D., Frame, J. M., Prieto, C., and Gupta, H. V.: What role does hydrological science play in the age of machine learning? Water Resour. Res., 57, e2020WR028091, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020WR028091, 2021.
Niu, M. Y., Horesh, L., and Chuang, I.: Recurrent neural networks in the eye of differential equations, arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1904.12933, 2019.
Pokharel, S., Roy, T., and Admiraal, D.: Effects of mass balance, energy balance, and storage-discharge constraints on LSTM for streamflow prediction, Environ. Modell. Softw., 166, 105730, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2023.105730, 2023.
Roy, A., Kasiviswanathan, K. S., Patidar, S., Adeloye, A. J., Soundharajan, B. S., and Ojha, C. S. P.: A physics-aware machine learning-based framework for minimizing prediction uncertainty of hydrological models, Water Resour. Res., 59, e2023WR034630, https://doi.org/10.1029/2023WR034630, 2023.
Rumelhart, D. E., Hinton, G. E., and Williams, R. J.: Learning representations by back-propagating errors, Nature, 323, 533–536, https://doi.org/10.1038/323533a0, 1986.
Shen, C.: A transdisciplinary review of deep learning research and its relevance for water resources scientists, Water Resour. Res., 54, 8558–8593, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018WR022643, 2018.
Shen, C., Appling, A. P., Gentine, P., Bandai, T., Gupta, H., Tartakovsky, A., Baity-Jesi, M., Fenicia, F., Kifer, D., Li, L., Liu, X., Ren, W., Zheng, Y., Harman, C. J., Clark, M., Farthing, M., Feng, D., Kumar, P., Aboelyazeed, D., Rahmani, F., Song, Y., Beck, H. E., Bindas, T., Dwivedi, D., Fang, K., Höge, M., Rackauckas, C., Mohanty, B., Roy, T., Xu, C., and Lawson, K.: Differentiable modelling to unify machine learning and physical models for geosciences, Nat. Rev. Earth Environ., 4, 552–567, https://doi.org/10.1038/s43017-023-00450-9, 2023.
Singh, V. P.: Estimation of parameters of a uniformly nonlinear surface runoff model, Hydrol. Res., 8, 33–46, https://doi.org/10.2166/nh.1977.0003, 1977.
Song, Y., Knoben, W. J. M., Clark, M. P., Feng, D., Lawson, K., Sawadekar, K., and Shen, C.: When ancient numerical demons meet physics-informed machine learning: adjoint-based gradients for implicit differentiable modeling, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 3051–3077, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-3051-2024, 2024.
Thaisiam, W., Yomwilai, K., and Wongchaisuwat, P.: Utilizing sequential modeling in collaborative method for flood forecasting, J. Hydrol., 636, 131290, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2024.131290, 2024.
Tsai, W. P., Feng, D., Pan, M., Beck, H., Lawson, K., Yang, Y., Liu, J., and Shen, C.: From calibration to parameter learning: Harnessing the scaling effects of big data in geoscientific modeling, Nat. Commun., 12, 5988, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-26107-z, 2021.
Wang, C., Jiang, S., Zheng, Y., Han, F., Kumar, R., Rakovec, O., and Li, S.: Distributed hydrological modeling with physics-encoded deep learning: A general framework and its application in the Amazon, Water Resour. Res., 60, e2023WR036170, https://doi.org/10.1029/2023WR036170, 2024.
Wang, N., Zhang, D., Chang, H., and Li, H.: Deep learning of subsurface flow via theory-guided neural network, J. Hydrol., 584, 124700, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2020.124700, 2020.
Wang, Y.-H. and Gupta, H. V.: Towards interpretable physical-conceptual catchment-scale hydrological modeling using the mass-conserving-perceptron, Water Resour. Res., 60, e2024WR037224, https://doi.org/10.1029/2024WR037224, 2024.
Worland, S. C., Steinschneider, S., Asquith, W., Knight, R., and Wieczorek, M.: Prediction and inference of flow duration curves using multioutput neural networks, Water Resour. Res., 55, 6850–6868, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018WR024463, 2019.
Xiang, X., Guo, S., Cui, Z., Wang, L., and Xu, C. Y.: Improving flood forecast accuracy based on explainable convolutional neural network by Grad-CAM method, J. Hydrol., 642, 131867, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2024.131867, 2024.
Xie, K., Liu, P., Zhang, J., Han, D., Wang, G., and Shen, C.: Physics-guided deep learning for rainfall-runoff modeling by considering extreme events and monotonic relationships, J. Hydrol., 603, 127043, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2021.127043, 2021.
Xu, Y., Hu, C., Wu, Q., Jian, S., Li, Z., Chen, Y., Zhang, G., Zhang, Z., and Wang, S.: Research on particle swarm optimization in LSTM neural networks for rainfall-runoff simulation, J. Hydrol., 608, 127553, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2022.127553, 2022.
Yang, S., Yang, D., Chen, J., Santisirisomboon, J., Lu, W., and Zhao, B.: A physical process and machine learning combined hydrological model for daily streamflow simulations of large watersheds with limited observation data, J. Hydrol., 590, 125206, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2020.125206, 2020.
Yann, L., Yoshua, B., and Geoffrey, H.: Deep learning, Nature, 521, 436–444, https://doi.org/10.1038/nature14539, 2015.
Yao, C., Li, Z., Bao, H., and Yu, Z.: Application of a developed grid-Xinanjiang model to Chinese watersheds for flood forecasting purpose, J. Hydrol. Eng., 14, 923–934, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0000067, 2009.
Yao, C., Zhang, K., Yu, Z., Li, Z., and Li, Q.: Improving the flood prediction capability of the Xinanjiang model in ungauged nested catchments by coupling it with the geomorphologic instantaneous unit hydrograph, J. Hydrol., 517, 1035–1048, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2014.06.037, 2014.
Zhao, R.: The Xinanjiang model applied in China, J. Hydrol., 135, 371–381, https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1694(92)90096-E, 1992.
Zhao, R.: A non-linear system model for basin concentration, J. Hydrol., 142, 477–482, https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1694(93)90024-4, 1993.
Zhong, L., Lei, H., Li, Z., and Jiang, S.: Advancing streamflow prediction in data-scarce regions through vegetation-constrained distributed hybrid ecohydrological models, J. Hydrol., 645, 132165, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2024.132165, 2024a.
Zhong, L., Lei, H., and Yang, J.: Development of a distributed physics-informed deep learning hydrological model for data-scarce regions, Water Resour. Res., 60, e2023WR036333, https://doi.org/10.1029/2023WR036333, 2024b.
Zhou, Y., Guo, S., Liu, P., and Xu, C.: Joint operation and dynamic control of flood limiting water levels for mixed cascade reservoir systems, J. Hydrol., 519, 248–257, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2014.07.029, 2014.
Short summary
Deep learning models achieve strong results in hydrological simulations but often lack links to physical processes. We integrate the principles of the Xinanjiang rainfall–runoff model into a recurrent neural network layer, then combine it with long short-term memory layers. This design improves accuracy while keeping the model explainable, showing small errors in flood peaks and timing.
Deep learning models achieve strong results in hydrological simulations but often lack links to...