A comparative analysis of deep learning models for soil temperature prediction in cold climates

Accurate soil temperature prediction in cold climates is crucial for optimizing agricultural practices, hydrological processes, water resource management, minimizing frost damage, and mitigating flood risks. The capacity of deep learning methods to capture intricate patterns and relationships in cli...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Theoretical and applied climatology 2024-04, Vol.155 (4), p.2571-2587
Hauptverfasser: Imanian, Hanifeh, Mohammadian, Abdolmajid, Farhangmehr, Vahid, Payeur, Pierre, Goodarzi, Danial, Hiedra Cobo, Juan, Shirkhani, Hamidreza
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 2587
container_issue 4
container_start_page 2571
container_title Theoretical and applied climatology
container_volume 155
creator Imanian, Hanifeh
Mohammadian, Abdolmajid
Farhangmehr, Vahid
Payeur, Pierre
Goodarzi, Danial
Hiedra Cobo, Juan
Shirkhani, Hamidreza
description Accurate soil temperature prediction in cold climates is crucial for optimizing agricultural practices, hydrological processes, water resource management, minimizing frost damage, and mitigating flood risks. The capacity of deep learning methods to capture intricate patterns and relationships in climate data enhances the accuracy of soil temperature predictions and offers substantial benefits for reducing climate change impacts. In the present study, a comparative analysis of different deep learning techniques, including long short-term memory (LSTM), convolutional neural network (CNN), and multi-layer perceptron (MLP), for predicting the soil temperature is provided. The study examined cold climate areas across Canada, from snowy regions to Arctic conditions. Input datasets were considered both as time series and shuffled order. To comprehensively evaluate the predictive approaches for soil temperature, four machine learning (ML) models—CNN, LSTM, MLP in time series, and MLP on shuffled data—were employed. The results showed ML models using input data as time series have struggled with accurate soil temperature prediction, especially in very cold and polar climates, likely due to the presence of ice layers on the soil, limiting fluctuations near the freezing point. The normalized RMSE (NRMSE) for the CNN, LSTM, and MLP was calculated to be 8.6%. 7.4%, and 6.9%, respectively, and the scatter index (SI) for CNN, LSTM, and MLP was calculated to be 1.0%, 0.9%, and 0.9%, respectively. On the other hand, MLP-shuffled that employs shuffled input data outperformed others with an NRMSE of 5.4% and an SI of 0.7%, by creating a generalized data representation, free from presentation sequence bias. This study showed that predicting soil temperature in very cold climates poses a challenge for machine learning, yet the MLP-shuffled model excels, attaining superior accuracy through the creation of a generalized data representation independent of the sample sequence.
doi_str_mv 10.1007/s00704-023-04781-x
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2957801476</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2957801476</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c270t-78445b0374357f1fd2d6dd91336a99d20309a90c78a9760b2164d92e0d932cd43</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE1LAzEQhoMoWKt_wFPAc3Ty0c3mWIpfUPCi4C2kSbak7G7WZCvtvze6gjcvM5f3eZl5ELqmcEsB5F0uAwQBxgkIWVNyOEEzKrggQtT8FM2ASkmkqt_P0UXOOwBgVSVnSC-xjd1gkhnDp8emN-0xh4xjg533A269SX3ot7iLzrcZNzHhHEOLR98NvlD75PGQvAt2DLHHoS99rcO2DZ0Zfb5EZ41ps7_63XP09nD_unoi65fH59VyTSyTMBJZC7HYAJeCL2RDG8dc5ZyinFdGKceAgzIKrKyNkhVsGK2EU8yDU5xZJ_gc3Uy9Q4ofe59HvYv7VL7JmqmFrIEKWZUUm1I2xZyTb_SQyp3pqCnob5F6EqmLSP0jUh8KxCcol3C_9emv-h_qC1hodqc</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2957801476</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A comparative analysis of deep learning models for soil temperature prediction in cold climates</title><source>SpringerNature Journals</source><creator>Imanian, Hanifeh ; Mohammadian, Abdolmajid ; Farhangmehr, Vahid ; Payeur, Pierre ; Goodarzi, Danial ; Hiedra Cobo, Juan ; Shirkhani, Hamidreza</creator><creatorcontrib>Imanian, Hanifeh ; Mohammadian, Abdolmajid ; Farhangmehr, Vahid ; Payeur, Pierre ; Goodarzi, Danial ; Hiedra Cobo, Juan ; Shirkhani, Hamidreza</creatorcontrib><description>Accurate soil temperature prediction in cold climates is crucial for optimizing agricultural practices, hydrological processes, water resource management, minimizing frost damage, and mitigating flood risks. The capacity of deep learning methods to capture intricate patterns and relationships in climate data enhances the accuracy of soil temperature predictions and offers substantial benefits for reducing climate change impacts. In the present study, a comparative analysis of different deep learning techniques, including long short-term memory (LSTM), convolutional neural network (CNN), and multi-layer perceptron (MLP), for predicting the soil temperature is provided. The study examined cold climate areas across Canada, from snowy regions to Arctic conditions. Input datasets were considered both as time series and shuffled order. To comprehensively evaluate the predictive approaches for soil temperature, four machine learning (ML) models—CNN, LSTM, MLP in time series, and MLP on shuffled data—were employed. The results showed ML models using input data as time series have struggled with accurate soil temperature prediction, especially in very cold and polar climates, likely due to the presence of ice layers on the soil, limiting fluctuations near the freezing point. The normalized RMSE (NRMSE) for the CNN, LSTM, and MLP was calculated to be 8.6%. 7.4%, and 6.9%, respectively, and the scatter index (SI) for CNN, LSTM, and MLP was calculated to be 1.0%, 0.9%, and 0.9%, respectively. On the other hand, MLP-shuffled that employs shuffled input data outperformed others with an NRMSE of 5.4% and an SI of 0.7%, by creating a generalized data representation, free from presentation sequence bias. This study showed that predicting soil temperature in very cold climates poses a challenge for machine learning, yet the MLP-shuffled model excels, attaining superior accuracy through the creation of a generalized data representation independent of the sample sequence.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0177-798X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1434-4483</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s00704-023-04781-x</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Vienna: Springer Vienna</publisher><subject>Accuracy ; Agricultural practices ; Aquatic Pollution ; Artificial neural networks ; Atmospheric Protection/Air Quality Control/Air Pollution ; Atmospheric Sciences ; Climate change ; Climate prediction ; Climatic data ; Climatology ; Cold climates ; Cold weather ; Comparative analysis ; Deep learning ; Earth and Environmental Science ; Earth Sciences ; Environmental impact ; Environmental risk ; Flood damage ; Flood management ; Flood risk ; Freezing ; Freezing point ; Frost damage ; Hydrologic processes ; Learning algorithms ; Long short-term memory ; Machine learning ; Melting points ; Multilayer perceptrons ; Multilayers ; Neural networks ; Polar climates ; Representations ; Resource management ; Sequencing ; Soil ; Soil layers ; Soil temperature ; Soils ; Temperature ; Temperature perception ; Time series ; Waste Water Technology ; Water Management ; Water Pollution Control ; Water resources ; Water resources management</subject><ispartof>Theoretical and applied climatology, 2024-04, Vol.155 (4), p.2571-2587</ispartof><rights>The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Austria, part of Springer Nature 2023. Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c270t-78445b0374357f1fd2d6dd91336a99d20309a90c78a9760b2164d92e0d932cd43</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-5022-1993 ; 0000-0003-3103-9752 ; 0000-0001-5381-8189 ; 0000-0002-1219-4362</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00704-023-04781-x$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00704-023-04781-x$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,41488,42557,51319</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Imanian, Hanifeh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mohammadian, Abdolmajid</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Farhangmehr, Vahid</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Payeur, Pierre</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Goodarzi, Danial</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hiedra Cobo, Juan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shirkhani, Hamidreza</creatorcontrib><title>A comparative analysis of deep learning models for soil temperature prediction in cold climates</title><title>Theoretical and applied climatology</title><addtitle>Theor Appl Climatol</addtitle><description>Accurate soil temperature prediction in cold climates is crucial for optimizing agricultural practices, hydrological processes, water resource management, minimizing frost damage, and mitigating flood risks. The capacity of deep learning methods to capture intricate patterns and relationships in climate data enhances the accuracy of soil temperature predictions and offers substantial benefits for reducing climate change impacts. In the present study, a comparative analysis of different deep learning techniques, including long short-term memory (LSTM), convolutional neural network (CNN), and multi-layer perceptron (MLP), for predicting the soil temperature is provided. The study examined cold climate areas across Canada, from snowy regions to Arctic conditions. Input datasets were considered both as time series and shuffled order. To comprehensively evaluate the predictive approaches for soil temperature, four machine learning (ML) models—CNN, LSTM, MLP in time series, and MLP on shuffled data—were employed. The results showed ML models using input data as time series have struggled with accurate soil temperature prediction, especially in very cold and polar climates, likely due to the presence of ice layers on the soil, limiting fluctuations near the freezing point. The normalized RMSE (NRMSE) for the CNN, LSTM, and MLP was calculated to be 8.6%. 7.4%, and 6.9%, respectively, and the scatter index (SI) for CNN, LSTM, and MLP was calculated to be 1.0%, 0.9%, and 0.9%, respectively. On the other hand, MLP-shuffled that employs shuffled input data outperformed others with an NRMSE of 5.4% and an SI of 0.7%, by creating a generalized data representation, free from presentation sequence bias. This study showed that predicting soil temperature in very cold climates poses a challenge for machine learning, yet the MLP-shuffled model excels, attaining superior accuracy through the creation of a generalized data representation independent of the sample sequence.</description><subject>Accuracy</subject><subject>Agricultural practices</subject><subject>Aquatic Pollution</subject><subject>Artificial neural networks</subject><subject>Atmospheric Protection/Air Quality Control/Air Pollution</subject><subject>Atmospheric Sciences</subject><subject>Climate change</subject><subject>Climate prediction</subject><subject>Climatic data</subject><subject>Climatology</subject><subject>Cold climates</subject><subject>Cold weather</subject><subject>Comparative analysis</subject><subject>Deep learning</subject><subject>Earth and Environmental Science</subject><subject>Earth Sciences</subject><subject>Environmental impact</subject><subject>Environmental risk</subject><subject>Flood damage</subject><subject>Flood management</subject><subject>Flood risk</subject><subject>Freezing</subject><subject>Freezing point</subject><subject>Frost damage</subject><subject>Hydrologic processes</subject><subject>Learning algorithms</subject><subject>Long short-term memory</subject><subject>Machine learning</subject><subject>Melting points</subject><subject>Multilayer perceptrons</subject><subject>Multilayers</subject><subject>Neural networks</subject><subject>Polar climates</subject><subject>Representations</subject><subject>Resource management</subject><subject>Sequencing</subject><subject>Soil</subject><subject>Soil layers</subject><subject>Soil temperature</subject><subject>Soils</subject><subject>Temperature</subject><subject>Temperature perception</subject><subject>Time series</subject><subject>Waste Water Technology</subject><subject>Water Management</subject><subject>Water Pollution Control</subject><subject>Water resources</subject><subject>Water resources management</subject><issn>0177-798X</issn><issn>1434-4483</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kE1LAzEQhoMoWKt_wFPAc3Ty0c3mWIpfUPCi4C2kSbak7G7WZCvtvze6gjcvM5f3eZl5ELqmcEsB5F0uAwQBxgkIWVNyOEEzKrggQtT8FM2ASkmkqt_P0UXOOwBgVSVnSC-xjd1gkhnDp8emN-0xh4xjg533A269SX3ot7iLzrcZNzHhHEOLR98NvlD75PGQvAt2DLHHoS99rcO2DZ0Zfb5EZ41ps7_63XP09nD_unoi65fH59VyTSyTMBJZC7HYAJeCL2RDG8dc5ZyinFdGKceAgzIKrKyNkhVsGK2EU8yDU5xZJ_gc3Uy9Q4ofe59HvYv7VL7JmqmFrIEKWZUUm1I2xZyTb_SQyp3pqCnob5F6EqmLSP0jUh8KxCcol3C_9emv-h_qC1hodqc</recordid><startdate>20240401</startdate><enddate>20240401</enddate><creator>Imanian, Hanifeh</creator><creator>Mohammadian, Abdolmajid</creator><creator>Farhangmehr, Vahid</creator><creator>Payeur, Pierre</creator><creator>Goodarzi, Danial</creator><creator>Hiedra Cobo, Juan</creator><creator>Shirkhani, Hamidreza</creator><general>Springer Vienna</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QH</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7TN</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>H96</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>L.G</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5022-1993</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3103-9752</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5381-8189</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1219-4362</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20240401</creationdate><title>A comparative analysis of deep learning models for soil temperature prediction in cold climates</title><author>Imanian, Hanifeh ; Mohammadian, Abdolmajid ; Farhangmehr, Vahid ; Payeur, Pierre ; Goodarzi, Danial ; Hiedra Cobo, Juan ; Shirkhani, Hamidreza</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c270t-78445b0374357f1fd2d6dd91336a99d20309a90c78a9760b2164d92e0d932cd43</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Accuracy</topic><topic>Agricultural practices</topic><topic>Aquatic Pollution</topic><topic>Artificial neural networks</topic><topic>Atmospheric Protection/Air Quality Control/Air Pollution</topic><topic>Atmospheric Sciences</topic><topic>Climate change</topic><topic>Climate prediction</topic><topic>Climatic data</topic><topic>Climatology</topic><topic>Cold climates</topic><topic>Cold weather</topic><topic>Comparative analysis</topic><topic>Deep learning</topic><topic>Earth and Environmental Science</topic><topic>Earth Sciences</topic><topic>Environmental impact</topic><topic>Environmental risk</topic><topic>Flood damage</topic><topic>Flood management</topic><topic>Flood risk</topic><topic>Freezing</topic><topic>Freezing point</topic><topic>Frost damage</topic><topic>Hydrologic processes</topic><topic>Learning algorithms</topic><topic>Long short-term memory</topic><topic>Machine learning</topic><topic>Melting points</topic><topic>Multilayer perceptrons</topic><topic>Multilayers</topic><topic>Neural networks</topic><topic>Polar climates</topic><topic>Representations</topic><topic>Resource management</topic><topic>Sequencing</topic><topic>Soil</topic><topic>Soil layers</topic><topic>Soil temperature</topic><topic>Soils</topic><topic>Temperature</topic><topic>Temperature perception</topic><topic>Time series</topic><topic>Waste Water Technology</topic><topic>Water Management</topic><topic>Water Pollution Control</topic><topic>Water resources</topic><topic>Water resources management</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Imanian, Hanifeh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mohammadian, Abdolmajid</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Farhangmehr, Vahid</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Payeur, Pierre</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Goodarzi, Danial</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hiedra Cobo, Juan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shirkhani, Hamidreza</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Aqualine</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Oceanic Abstracts</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 2: Ocean Technology, Policy &amp; Non-Living Resources</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><jtitle>Theoretical and applied climatology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Imanian, Hanifeh</au><au>Mohammadian, Abdolmajid</au><au>Farhangmehr, Vahid</au><au>Payeur, Pierre</au><au>Goodarzi, Danial</au><au>Hiedra Cobo, Juan</au><au>Shirkhani, Hamidreza</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A comparative analysis of deep learning models for soil temperature prediction in cold climates</atitle><jtitle>Theoretical and applied climatology</jtitle><stitle>Theor Appl Climatol</stitle><date>2024-04-01</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>155</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>2571</spage><epage>2587</epage><pages>2571-2587</pages><issn>0177-798X</issn><eissn>1434-4483</eissn><abstract>Accurate soil temperature prediction in cold climates is crucial for optimizing agricultural practices, hydrological processes, water resource management, minimizing frost damage, and mitigating flood risks. The capacity of deep learning methods to capture intricate patterns and relationships in climate data enhances the accuracy of soil temperature predictions and offers substantial benefits for reducing climate change impacts. In the present study, a comparative analysis of different deep learning techniques, including long short-term memory (LSTM), convolutional neural network (CNN), and multi-layer perceptron (MLP), for predicting the soil temperature is provided. The study examined cold climate areas across Canada, from snowy regions to Arctic conditions. Input datasets were considered both as time series and shuffled order. To comprehensively evaluate the predictive approaches for soil temperature, four machine learning (ML) models—CNN, LSTM, MLP in time series, and MLP on shuffled data—were employed. The results showed ML models using input data as time series have struggled with accurate soil temperature prediction, especially in very cold and polar climates, likely due to the presence of ice layers on the soil, limiting fluctuations near the freezing point. The normalized RMSE (NRMSE) for the CNN, LSTM, and MLP was calculated to be 8.6%. 7.4%, and 6.9%, respectively, and the scatter index (SI) for CNN, LSTM, and MLP was calculated to be 1.0%, 0.9%, and 0.9%, respectively. On the other hand, MLP-shuffled that employs shuffled input data outperformed others with an NRMSE of 5.4% and an SI of 0.7%, by creating a generalized data representation, free from presentation sequence bias. This study showed that predicting soil temperature in very cold climates poses a challenge for machine learning, yet the MLP-shuffled model excels, attaining superior accuracy through the creation of a generalized data representation independent of the sample sequence.</abstract><cop>Vienna</cop><pub>Springer Vienna</pub><doi>10.1007/s00704-023-04781-x</doi><tpages>17</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5022-1993</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3103-9752</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5381-8189</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1219-4362</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0177-798X
ispartof Theoretical and applied climatology, 2024-04, Vol.155 (4), p.2571-2587
issn 0177-798X
1434-4483
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2957801476
source SpringerNature Journals
subjects Accuracy
Agricultural practices
Aquatic Pollution
Artificial neural networks
Atmospheric Protection/Air Quality Control/Air Pollution
Atmospheric Sciences
Climate change
Climate prediction
Climatic data
Climatology
Cold climates
Cold weather
Comparative analysis
Deep learning
Earth and Environmental Science
Earth Sciences
Environmental impact
Environmental risk
Flood damage
Flood management
Flood risk
Freezing
Freezing point
Frost damage
Hydrologic processes
Learning algorithms
Long short-term memory
Machine learning
Melting points
Multilayer perceptrons
Multilayers
Neural networks
Polar climates
Representations
Resource management
Sequencing
Soil
Soil layers
Soil temperature
Soils
Temperature
Temperature perception
Time series
Waste Water Technology
Water Management
Water Pollution Control
Water resources
Water resources management
title A comparative analysis of deep learning models for soil temperature prediction in cold climates
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-18T17%3A43%3A10IST&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=A%20comparative%20analysis%20of%20deep%20learning%20models%20for%20soil%20temperature%20prediction%20in%20cold%20climates&rft.jtitle=Theoretical%20and%20applied%20climatology&rft.au=Imanian,%20Hanifeh&rft.date=2024-04-01&rft.volume=155&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=2571&rft.epage=2587&rft.pages=2571-2587&rft.issn=0177-798X&rft.eissn=1434-4483&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s00704-023-04781-x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2957801476%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=2957801476&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true