Comparison of prediction performances between Box–Jenkins and Kalman filter models––Case of annual and monthly sreamflows in Algeria

The present study aims to investigate and to compare Box–Jenkins (BJ) and Kalman filter (KF) models to predict stream flows in northern Algeria. For this purpose, annual and monthly data of 10 hydrometric stations have been considered for application. The results with BJ models led to five Autoregre...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Desalination and water treatment 2016-08, Vol.57 (36), p.17095-17103
Hauptverfasser: Boukharouba, Khadidja, Kettab, Ahmed
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 17103
container_issue 36
container_start_page 17095
container_title Desalination and water treatment
container_volume 57
creator Boukharouba, Khadidja
Kettab, Ahmed
description The present study aims to investigate and to compare Box–Jenkins (BJ) and Kalman filter (KF) models to predict stream flows in northern Algeria. For this purpose, annual and monthly data of 10 hydrometric stations have been considered for application. The results with BJ models led to five Autoregressive and integrated moving average (ARIMA) models for the annual streamflows, with an overall mean explained variance at 63% level, whereas for the monthly flows they led to 10 Seasonal Autoregressive and integrated moving average (SARIMA) models, with an overall mean explained variance around 75%. On the other hand, KF methodology led to two on-line operations, where multisite optimal annual and monthly predictions are obtained. The KF and BJ predictive performances are then compared via some statistical parameters of their prediction error. For both of annual and monthly scales, it is found that KF model performs better in predictions. For example, the mean prediction error for KF is 16 times smaller than the BJ models, the corresponding standard deviation, minimum and maximum values are respectively, 5, 6, and 3 times smaller than the BJ alternatives. This denotes the superiority of KF for the prediction of stream flows in northern Algeria. In addition, an eventual tendency of KF to the underestimation has also been noticed from the prediction error standard deviation illustration.
doi_str_mv 10.1080/19443994.2015.1109558
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1816024535</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S1944398624030911</els_id><sourcerecordid>4046662941</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c351t-d7097b781db3d7c4e93820c0ba79d2d722e2a70ce56cbded24583f09fe4d035b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkc9OHSEYxSdNTWqsj9CExE0398qf4QKrRm9aWzVxo2vCwDcVy8AU5lbdue7WN_RJ5Ho1MW4kJHyQ3zkJ5zTNF4LnBEu8T1TbMqXaOcWEzwnBinP5odlev8-YkouPr-ZPzW4pV7gu3gre0u3m_zINo8m-pIhSj8YMztvJ19sIuU95MNFCQR1M1wARHaabh7v7Y4h_fCzIRIdOTKgM6n2YIKMhOQilInUvTYG1p4lxZcITPKQ4XYZbVDKYoQ_puiAf0UH4Ddmbz81Wb0KB3edzp7n48f18-XN2enb0a3lwOrOMk2nmBFaiE5K4jjlhW1BMUmxxZ4Ry1AlKgRqBLfCF7Rw42nLJeqx6aB1mvGM7zdeN75jT3xWUSQ--WAjBREirookkC1xVjL-PClXzloKriu69Qa_SKsf6kUpJQTChRFSKbyibU6kp9HrMfjD5VhOs133qlz71uk_93GfVfdvoarrwz0PWxXqo1TifwU7aJf-OwyOcraqP</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1787101217</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of prediction performances between Box–Jenkins and Kalman filter models––Case of annual and monthly sreamflows in Algeria</title><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Boukharouba, Khadidja ; Kettab, Ahmed</creator><creatorcontrib>Boukharouba, Khadidja ; Kettab, Ahmed</creatorcontrib><description>The present study aims to investigate and to compare Box–Jenkins (BJ) and Kalman filter (KF) models to predict stream flows in northern Algeria. For this purpose, annual and monthly data of 10 hydrometric stations have been considered for application. The results with BJ models led to five Autoregressive and integrated moving average (ARIMA) models for the annual streamflows, with an overall mean explained variance at 63% level, whereas for the monthly flows they led to 10 Seasonal Autoregressive and integrated moving average (SARIMA) models, with an overall mean explained variance around 75%. On the other hand, KF methodology led to two on-line operations, where multisite optimal annual and monthly predictions are obtained. The KF and BJ predictive performances are then compared via some statistical parameters of their prediction error. For both of annual and monthly scales, it is found that KF model performs better in predictions. For example, the mean prediction error for KF is 16 times smaller than the BJ models, the corresponding standard deviation, minimum and maximum values are respectively, 5, 6, and 3 times smaller than the BJ alternatives. This denotes the superiority of KF for the prediction of stream flows in northern Algeria. In addition, an eventual tendency of KF to the underestimation has also been noticed from the prediction error standard deviation illustration.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1944-3986</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1944-3994</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1944-3986</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1080/19443994.2015.1109558</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Abingdon: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Algeria ; ARIMA ; Economic models ; Errors ; Hydrometric stations ; Kalman filter ; Kalman filters ; Mathematical models ; On-line systems ; Prediction error ; SARIMA ; Standard deviation ; Stream discharge ; Stream flow ; Stream flows ; Variance ; Water runoff</subject><ispartof>Desalination and water treatment, 2016-08, Vol.57 (36), p.17095-17103</ispartof><rights>2015 Elsevier Inc.</rights><rights>2015 Balaban Desalination Publications. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c351t-d7097b781db3d7c4e93820c0ba79d2d722e2a70ce56cbded24583f09fe4d035b3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Boukharouba, Khadidja</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kettab, Ahmed</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of prediction performances between Box–Jenkins and Kalman filter models––Case of annual and monthly sreamflows in Algeria</title><title>Desalination and water treatment</title><description>The present study aims to investigate and to compare Box–Jenkins (BJ) and Kalman filter (KF) models to predict stream flows in northern Algeria. For this purpose, annual and monthly data of 10 hydrometric stations have been considered for application. The results with BJ models led to five Autoregressive and integrated moving average (ARIMA) models for the annual streamflows, with an overall mean explained variance at 63% level, whereas for the monthly flows they led to 10 Seasonal Autoregressive and integrated moving average (SARIMA) models, with an overall mean explained variance around 75%. On the other hand, KF methodology led to two on-line operations, where multisite optimal annual and monthly predictions are obtained. The KF and BJ predictive performances are then compared via some statistical parameters of their prediction error. For both of annual and monthly scales, it is found that KF model performs better in predictions. For example, the mean prediction error for KF is 16 times smaller than the BJ models, the corresponding standard deviation, minimum and maximum values are respectively, 5, 6, and 3 times smaller than the BJ alternatives. This denotes the superiority of KF for the prediction of stream flows in northern Algeria. In addition, an eventual tendency of KF to the underestimation has also been noticed from the prediction error standard deviation illustration.</description><subject>Algeria</subject><subject>ARIMA</subject><subject>Economic models</subject><subject>Errors</subject><subject>Hydrometric stations</subject><subject>Kalman filter</subject><subject>Kalman filters</subject><subject>Mathematical models</subject><subject>On-line systems</subject><subject>Prediction error</subject><subject>SARIMA</subject><subject>Standard deviation</subject><subject>Stream discharge</subject><subject>Stream flow</subject><subject>Stream flows</subject><subject>Variance</subject><subject>Water runoff</subject><issn>1944-3986</issn><issn>1944-3994</issn><issn>1944-3986</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkc9OHSEYxSdNTWqsj9CExE0398qf4QKrRm9aWzVxo2vCwDcVy8AU5lbdue7WN_RJ5Ho1MW4kJHyQ3zkJ5zTNF4LnBEu8T1TbMqXaOcWEzwnBinP5odlev8-YkouPr-ZPzW4pV7gu3gre0u3m_zINo8m-pIhSj8YMztvJ19sIuU95MNFCQR1M1wARHaabh7v7Y4h_fCzIRIdOTKgM6n2YIKMhOQilInUvTYG1p4lxZcITPKQ4XYZbVDKYoQ_puiAf0UH4Ddmbz81Wb0KB3edzp7n48f18-XN2enb0a3lwOrOMk2nmBFaiE5K4jjlhW1BMUmxxZ4Ry1AlKgRqBLfCF7Rw42nLJeqx6aB1mvGM7zdeN75jT3xWUSQ--WAjBREirookkC1xVjL-PClXzloKriu69Qa_SKsf6kUpJQTChRFSKbyibU6kp9HrMfjD5VhOs133qlz71uk_93GfVfdvoarrwz0PWxXqo1TifwU7aJf-OwyOcraqP</recordid><startdate>201608</startdate><enddate>201608</enddate><creator>Boukharouba, Khadidja</creator><creator>Kettab, Ahmed</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><general>Elsevier Limited</general><scope>6I.</scope><scope>AAFTH</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QH</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>7TN</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H96</scope><scope>H97</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>SOI</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201608</creationdate><title>Comparison of prediction performances between Box–Jenkins and Kalman filter models––Case of annual and monthly sreamflows in Algeria</title><author>Boukharouba, Khadidja ; Kettab, Ahmed</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c351t-d7097b781db3d7c4e93820c0ba79d2d722e2a70ce56cbded24583f09fe4d035b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Algeria</topic><topic>ARIMA</topic><topic>Economic models</topic><topic>Errors</topic><topic>Hydrometric stations</topic><topic>Kalman filter</topic><topic>Kalman filters</topic><topic>Mathematical models</topic><topic>On-line systems</topic><topic>Prediction error</topic><topic>SARIMA</topic><topic>Standard deviation</topic><topic>Stream discharge</topic><topic>Stream flow</topic><topic>Stream flows</topic><topic>Variance</topic><topic>Water runoff</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Boukharouba, Khadidja</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kettab, Ahmed</creatorcontrib><collection>ScienceDirect Open Access Titles</collection><collection>Elsevier:ScienceDirect:Open Access</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Aqualine</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Oceanic Abstracts</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 2: Ocean Technology, Policy &amp; Non-Living Resources</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 3: Aquatic Pollution &amp; Environmental Quality</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Desalination and water treatment</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Boukharouba, Khadidja</au><au>Kettab, Ahmed</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of prediction performances between Box–Jenkins and Kalman filter models––Case of annual and monthly sreamflows in Algeria</atitle><jtitle>Desalination and water treatment</jtitle><date>2016-08</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>57</volume><issue>36</issue><spage>17095</spage><epage>17103</epage><pages>17095-17103</pages><issn>1944-3986</issn><issn>1944-3994</issn><eissn>1944-3986</eissn><abstract>The present study aims to investigate and to compare Box–Jenkins (BJ) and Kalman filter (KF) models to predict stream flows in northern Algeria. For this purpose, annual and monthly data of 10 hydrometric stations have been considered for application. The results with BJ models led to five Autoregressive and integrated moving average (ARIMA) models for the annual streamflows, with an overall mean explained variance at 63% level, whereas for the monthly flows they led to 10 Seasonal Autoregressive and integrated moving average (SARIMA) models, with an overall mean explained variance around 75%. On the other hand, KF methodology led to two on-line operations, where multisite optimal annual and monthly predictions are obtained. The KF and BJ predictive performances are then compared via some statistical parameters of their prediction error. For both of annual and monthly scales, it is found that KF model performs better in predictions. For example, the mean prediction error for KF is 16 times smaller than the BJ models, the corresponding standard deviation, minimum and maximum values are respectively, 5, 6, and 3 times smaller than the BJ alternatives. This denotes the superiority of KF for the prediction of stream flows in northern Algeria. In addition, an eventual tendency of KF to the underestimation has also been noticed from the prediction error standard deviation illustration.</abstract><cop>Abingdon</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><doi>10.1080/19443994.2015.1109558</doi><tpages>9</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1944-3986
ispartof Desalination and water treatment, 2016-08, Vol.57 (36), p.17095-17103
issn 1944-3986
1944-3994
1944-3986
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1816024535
source Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects Algeria
ARIMA
Economic models
Errors
Hydrometric stations
Kalman filter
Kalman filters
Mathematical models
On-line systems
Prediction error
SARIMA
Standard deviation
Stream discharge
Stream flow
Stream flows
Variance
Water runoff
title Comparison of prediction performances between Box–Jenkins and Kalman filter models––Case of annual and monthly sreamflows in Algeria
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-29T03%3A33%3A27IST&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=Comparison%20of%20prediction%20performances%20between%20Box%E2%80%93Jenkins%20and%20Kalman%20filter%20models%E2%80%93%E2%80%93Case%20of%20annual%20and%20monthly%20sreamflows%20in%20Algeria&rft.jtitle=Desalination%20and%20water%20treatment&rft.au=Boukharouba,%20Khadidja&rft.date=2016-08&rft.volume=57&rft.issue=36&rft.spage=17095&rft.epage=17103&rft.pages=17095-17103&rft.issn=1944-3986&rft.eissn=1944-3986&rft_id=info:doi/10.1080/19443994.2015.1109558&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E4046662941%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=1787101217&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_els_id=S1944398624030911&rfr_iscdi=true