Evaluation of stacking and blending ensemble learning methods for estimating daily reference evapotranspiration

•Stacking/blending models were first employed for daily ETo estimation.•Stacking/blending models were compared with basic and empirical models.•Stacking/blending models had better accuracy and portability across stations.•Stacking/blending models had higher accuracy when data or inputs were limited....

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Computers and electronics in agriculture 2021-05, Vol.184, p.106039, Article 106039
Hauptverfasser: Wu, Tianao, Zhang, Wei, Jiao, Xiyun, Guo, Weihua, Alhaj Hamoud, Yousef
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue
container_start_page 106039
container_title Computers and electronics in agriculture
container_volume 184
creator Wu, Tianao
Zhang, Wei
Jiao, Xiyun
Guo, Weihua
Alhaj Hamoud, Yousef
description •Stacking/blending models were first employed for daily ETo estimation.•Stacking/blending models were compared with basic and empirical models.•Stacking/blending models had better accuracy and portability across stations.•Stacking/blending models had higher accuracy when data or inputs were limited.•Blending models had similar accuracy to stacking models with less time costs. Precise reference evapotranspiration (ETo) estimation and prediction are the first steps to realize efficient agricultural water resources management. As machine learning methods are widely applied in ETo estimation, we assess whether a high accuracy can be attained by stacking or integrating more models. Can the accuracy be increased indefinitely and at what cost? To this end, this study reports the first evaluation of stacking and blending ensemble models for daily ETo estimation. The stacking and blending models adopted a 2-layer structure: level-0 basic models included random forest (RF), support vector regression (SVR), multilayer perceptron neural network (MLP) and K-Nearest Neighbor regression (KNN); level-1 outputted the final result via linear regression (LR). The accuracy and computational costs of stacking and blending models were compared with those of the 4 basic models and 3 empirical models under 5 complete and limited input conditions. A station-cross validation on models with solar radiation input was further performed to study the portability of the tested models. The results indicated that both stacking and blending models performed better than the basic and empirical models regardless of input combination, and the former (R2 ranged from 0.6602 to 0.9977, with an average AIC of −7785.68) achieved a slightly higher accuracy than the latter models (R2: 0.6562–0.9974; average AIC: −7689.68). Meanwhile, the stacking and blending models were more portable (RMSE ranged from 0.5445 to 0.8799 and 0.5511–0.8767 mm day−1, respectively) than basic models across stations in different climate zones. In terms of computational cost, both stacking and blending models were able to achieve significantly better accuracy than basic models in reasonable time with smaller training data size, while the blending models could obtain similar high accuracy to stacking models in less time after increasing the size of the training data. Therefore, the stacking and blending ensemble models can be highly recommend for ETo estimation, especially when the available training data set or meteorologic
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.compag.2021.106039
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2528880257</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0168169921000570</els_id><sourcerecordid>2528880257</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c334t-b89eb4dd2fa174137b65b3c23bc1a31dcaa75ca5f184cc6e23b748b52415ee6d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9UE1PxCAUJEYT19V_4IHEc9cCbaEXE7NZP5JNvOiZUHhdqV2o0N1k_73UevZEZpg3780gdEvyFclJdd-ttN8PareiOSWJqnJWn6EFEZxmnOT8HC2STGSkqutLdBVjlydcC75AfnNU_UGN1jvsWxxHpb-s22HlDG56cGYC4CLsE8I9qOAmZg_jpzcRtz5giKPdJ4dEG2X7Ew7QQgCnAcNRDX4MysXBht8l1-iiVX2Em793iT6eNu_rl2z79vy6ftxmmrFizBpRQ1MYQ1tFeEEYb6qyYZqyRhPFiNFK8VKrsiWi0LqC9MEL0ZS0ICVAZdgS3c2-Q_Dfh3Si7PwhuLRS0pIKIXJa8qQqZpUOPsZ0txxCyhJOkuRyqlZ2cq5WTtXKudo09jCPQUpwtBBk1HYKbGwAPUrj7f8GP_XehtA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2528880257</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Evaluation of stacking and blending ensemble learning methods for estimating daily reference evapotranspiration</title><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Wu, Tianao ; Zhang, Wei ; Jiao, Xiyun ; Guo, Weihua ; Alhaj Hamoud, Yousef</creator><creatorcontrib>Wu, Tianao ; Zhang, Wei ; Jiao, Xiyun ; Guo, Weihua ; Alhaj Hamoud, Yousef</creatorcontrib><description>•Stacking/blending models were first employed for daily ETo estimation.•Stacking/blending models were compared with basic and empirical models.•Stacking/blending models had better accuracy and portability across stations.•Stacking/blending models had higher accuracy when data or inputs were limited.•Blending models had similar accuracy to stacking models with less time costs. Precise reference evapotranspiration (ETo) estimation and prediction are the first steps to realize efficient agricultural water resources management. As machine learning methods are widely applied in ETo estimation, we assess whether a high accuracy can be attained by stacking or integrating more models. Can the accuracy be increased indefinitely and at what cost? To this end, this study reports the first evaluation of stacking and blending ensemble models for daily ETo estimation. The stacking and blending models adopted a 2-layer structure: level-0 basic models included random forest (RF), support vector regression (SVR), multilayer perceptron neural network (MLP) and K-Nearest Neighbor regression (KNN); level-1 outputted the final result via linear regression (LR). The accuracy and computational costs of stacking and blending models were compared with those of the 4 basic models and 3 empirical models under 5 complete and limited input conditions. A station-cross validation on models with solar radiation input was further performed to study the portability of the tested models. The results indicated that both stacking and blending models performed better than the basic and empirical models regardless of input combination, and the former (R2 ranged from 0.6602 to 0.9977, with an average AIC of −7785.68) achieved a slightly higher accuracy than the latter models (R2: 0.6562–0.9974; average AIC: −7689.68). Meanwhile, the stacking and blending models were more portable (RMSE ranged from 0.5445 to 0.8799 and 0.5511–0.8767 mm day−1, respectively) than basic models across stations in different climate zones. In terms of computational cost, both stacking and blending models were able to achieve significantly better accuracy than basic models in reasonable time with smaller training data size, while the blending models could obtain similar high accuracy to stacking models in less time after increasing the size of the training data. Therefore, the stacking and blending ensemble models can be highly recommend for ETo estimation, especially when the available training data set or meteorological variables are limited.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0168-1699</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1872-7107</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.compag.2021.106039</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Amsterdam: Elsevier B.V</publisher><subject>Accuracy ; Blending ; Blending ensemble learning method ; Climate models ; Computational costs comparison ; Computing costs ; Ensemble learning ; Evaluation ; Evapotranspiration ; Machine learning ; Model accuracy ; Multilayer perceptrons ; Neural networks ; Portability analysis ; Reference evapotranspiration estimation ; Regression ; Solar radiation ; Stacking ; Stacking ensemble learning method ; Support vector machines ; Water resources management</subject><ispartof>Computers and electronics in agriculture, 2021-05, Vol.184, p.106039, Article 106039</ispartof><rights>2021 Elsevier B.V.</rights><rights>Copyright Elsevier BV May 2021</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c334t-b89eb4dd2fa174137b65b3c23bc1a31dcaa75ca5f184cc6e23b748b52415ee6d3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c334t-b89eb4dd2fa174137b65b3c23bc1a31dcaa75ca5f184cc6e23b748b52415ee6d3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2021.106039$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,3537,27905,27906,45976</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Wu, Tianao</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Wei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jiao, Xiyun</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Guo, Weihua</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Alhaj Hamoud, Yousef</creatorcontrib><title>Evaluation of stacking and blending ensemble learning methods for estimating daily reference evapotranspiration</title><title>Computers and electronics in agriculture</title><description>•Stacking/blending models were first employed for daily ETo estimation.•Stacking/blending models were compared with basic and empirical models.•Stacking/blending models had better accuracy and portability across stations.•Stacking/blending models had higher accuracy when data or inputs were limited.•Blending models had similar accuracy to stacking models with less time costs. Precise reference evapotranspiration (ETo) estimation and prediction are the first steps to realize efficient agricultural water resources management. As machine learning methods are widely applied in ETo estimation, we assess whether a high accuracy can be attained by stacking or integrating more models. Can the accuracy be increased indefinitely and at what cost? To this end, this study reports the first evaluation of stacking and blending ensemble models for daily ETo estimation. The stacking and blending models adopted a 2-layer structure: level-0 basic models included random forest (RF), support vector regression (SVR), multilayer perceptron neural network (MLP) and K-Nearest Neighbor regression (KNN); level-1 outputted the final result via linear regression (LR). The accuracy and computational costs of stacking and blending models were compared with those of the 4 basic models and 3 empirical models under 5 complete and limited input conditions. A station-cross validation on models with solar radiation input was further performed to study the portability of the tested models. The results indicated that both stacking and blending models performed better than the basic and empirical models regardless of input combination, and the former (R2 ranged from 0.6602 to 0.9977, with an average AIC of −7785.68) achieved a slightly higher accuracy than the latter models (R2: 0.6562–0.9974; average AIC: −7689.68). Meanwhile, the stacking and blending models were more portable (RMSE ranged from 0.5445 to 0.8799 and 0.5511–0.8767 mm day−1, respectively) than basic models across stations in different climate zones. In terms of computational cost, both stacking and blending models were able to achieve significantly better accuracy than basic models in reasonable time with smaller training data size, while the blending models could obtain similar high accuracy to stacking models in less time after increasing the size of the training data. Therefore, the stacking and blending ensemble models can be highly recommend for ETo estimation, especially when the available training data set or meteorological variables are limited.</description><subject>Accuracy</subject><subject>Blending</subject><subject>Blending ensemble learning method</subject><subject>Climate models</subject><subject>Computational costs comparison</subject><subject>Computing costs</subject><subject>Ensemble learning</subject><subject>Evaluation</subject><subject>Evapotranspiration</subject><subject>Machine learning</subject><subject>Model accuracy</subject><subject>Multilayer perceptrons</subject><subject>Neural networks</subject><subject>Portability analysis</subject><subject>Reference evapotranspiration estimation</subject><subject>Regression</subject><subject>Solar radiation</subject><subject>Stacking</subject><subject>Stacking ensemble learning method</subject><subject>Support vector machines</subject><subject>Water resources management</subject><issn>0168-1699</issn><issn>1872-7107</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9UE1PxCAUJEYT19V_4IHEc9cCbaEXE7NZP5JNvOiZUHhdqV2o0N1k_73UevZEZpg3780gdEvyFclJdd-ttN8PareiOSWJqnJWn6EFEZxmnOT8HC2STGSkqutLdBVjlydcC75AfnNU_UGN1jvsWxxHpb-s22HlDG56cGYC4CLsE8I9qOAmZg_jpzcRtz5giKPdJ4dEG2X7Ew7QQgCnAcNRDX4MysXBht8l1-iiVX2Em793iT6eNu_rl2z79vy6ftxmmrFizBpRQ1MYQ1tFeEEYb6qyYZqyRhPFiNFK8VKrsiWi0LqC9MEL0ZS0ICVAZdgS3c2-Q_Dfh3Si7PwhuLRS0pIKIXJa8qQqZpUOPsZ0txxCyhJOkuRyqlZ2cq5WTtXKudo09jCPQUpwtBBk1HYKbGwAPUrj7f8GP_XehtA</recordid><startdate>202105</startdate><enddate>202105</enddate><creator>Wu, Tianao</creator><creator>Zhang, Wei</creator><creator>Jiao, Xiyun</creator><creator>Guo, Weihua</creator><creator>Alhaj Hamoud, Yousef</creator><general>Elsevier B.V</general><general>Elsevier BV</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7SC</scope><scope>7SP</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>JQ2</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>L7M</scope><scope>L~C</scope><scope>L~D</scope></search><sort><creationdate>202105</creationdate><title>Evaluation of stacking and blending ensemble learning methods for estimating daily reference evapotranspiration</title><author>Wu, Tianao ; Zhang, Wei ; Jiao, Xiyun ; Guo, Weihua ; Alhaj Hamoud, Yousef</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c334t-b89eb4dd2fa174137b65b3c23bc1a31dcaa75ca5f184cc6e23b748b52415ee6d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Accuracy</topic><topic>Blending</topic><topic>Blending ensemble learning method</topic><topic>Climate models</topic><topic>Computational costs comparison</topic><topic>Computing costs</topic><topic>Ensemble learning</topic><topic>Evaluation</topic><topic>Evapotranspiration</topic><topic>Machine learning</topic><topic>Model accuracy</topic><topic>Multilayer perceptrons</topic><topic>Neural networks</topic><topic>Portability analysis</topic><topic>Reference evapotranspiration estimation</topic><topic>Regression</topic><topic>Solar radiation</topic><topic>Stacking</topic><topic>Stacking ensemble learning method</topic><topic>Support vector machines</topic><topic>Water resources management</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Wu, Tianao</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Wei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jiao, Xiyun</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Guo, Weihua</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Alhaj Hamoud, Yousef</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts</collection><collection>Electronics &amp; Communications Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Computer Science Collection</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts – Academic</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts Professional</collection><jtitle>Computers and electronics in agriculture</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Wu, Tianao</au><au>Zhang, Wei</au><au>Jiao, Xiyun</au><au>Guo, Weihua</au><au>Alhaj Hamoud, Yousef</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Evaluation of stacking and blending ensemble learning methods for estimating daily reference evapotranspiration</atitle><jtitle>Computers and electronics in agriculture</jtitle><date>2021-05</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>184</volume><spage>106039</spage><pages>106039-</pages><artnum>106039</artnum><issn>0168-1699</issn><eissn>1872-7107</eissn><abstract>•Stacking/blending models were first employed for daily ETo estimation.•Stacking/blending models were compared with basic and empirical models.•Stacking/blending models had better accuracy and portability across stations.•Stacking/blending models had higher accuracy when data or inputs were limited.•Blending models had similar accuracy to stacking models with less time costs. Precise reference evapotranspiration (ETo) estimation and prediction are the first steps to realize efficient agricultural water resources management. As machine learning methods are widely applied in ETo estimation, we assess whether a high accuracy can be attained by stacking or integrating more models. Can the accuracy be increased indefinitely and at what cost? To this end, this study reports the first evaluation of stacking and blending ensemble models for daily ETo estimation. The stacking and blending models adopted a 2-layer structure: level-0 basic models included random forest (RF), support vector regression (SVR), multilayer perceptron neural network (MLP) and K-Nearest Neighbor regression (KNN); level-1 outputted the final result via linear regression (LR). The accuracy and computational costs of stacking and blending models were compared with those of the 4 basic models and 3 empirical models under 5 complete and limited input conditions. A station-cross validation on models with solar radiation input was further performed to study the portability of the tested models. The results indicated that both stacking and blending models performed better than the basic and empirical models regardless of input combination, and the former (R2 ranged from 0.6602 to 0.9977, with an average AIC of −7785.68) achieved a slightly higher accuracy than the latter models (R2: 0.6562–0.9974; average AIC: −7689.68). Meanwhile, the stacking and blending models were more portable (RMSE ranged from 0.5445 to 0.8799 and 0.5511–0.8767 mm day−1, respectively) than basic models across stations in different climate zones. In terms of computational cost, both stacking and blending models were able to achieve significantly better accuracy than basic models in reasonable time with smaller training data size, while the blending models could obtain similar high accuracy to stacking models in less time after increasing the size of the training data. Therefore, the stacking and blending ensemble models can be highly recommend for ETo estimation, especially when the available training data set or meteorological variables are limited.</abstract><cop>Amsterdam</cop><pub>Elsevier B.V</pub><doi>10.1016/j.compag.2021.106039</doi></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0168-1699
ispartof Computers and electronics in agriculture, 2021-05, Vol.184, p.106039, Article 106039
issn 0168-1699
1872-7107
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2528880257
source Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals
subjects Accuracy
Blending
Blending ensemble learning method
Climate models
Computational costs comparison
Computing costs
Ensemble learning
Evaluation
Evapotranspiration
Machine learning
Model accuracy
Multilayer perceptrons
Neural networks
Portability analysis
Reference evapotranspiration estimation
Regression
Solar radiation
Stacking
Stacking ensemble learning method
Support vector machines
Water resources management
title Evaluation of stacking and blending ensemble learning methods for estimating daily reference evapotranspiration
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-21T08%3A35%3A44IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Evaluation%20of%20stacking%20and%20blending%20ensemble%20learning%20methods%20for%20estimating%20daily%20reference%20evapotranspiration&rft.jtitle=Computers%20and%20electronics%20in%20agriculture&rft.au=Wu,%20Tianao&rft.date=2021-05&rft.volume=184&rft.spage=106039&rft.pages=106039-&rft.artnum=106039&rft.issn=0168-1699&rft.eissn=1872-7107&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.compag.2021.106039&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2528880257%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2528880257&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_els_id=S0168169921000570&rfr_iscdi=true