journal article·2025-06-13Open access

Hybrid Hydrological Forecasting Through a Physical Model and a Weather-Informed Transformer Model: A Case Study in Greek Watershed

Haris Ampas, Ioannis Refanidis, Vasilios Ampas

Applied Sciences· Volume 15· Issue 12

Abstract

This study explores a hybrid AI framework for streamflow forecasting that integrates physically based hydrological modeling, bias correction, and deep learning. HEC-HMS simulations generate synthetic discharge, which a machine learning-based bias correction model adjusts for irrigation-induced discrepancies—improving the Nash–Sutcliffe Efficiency (NSE) from 0.55 to 0.84, the Kling–Gupta Efficiency (KGE) from 0.67 to 0.89, and reducing the RMSE from 1.084 to 0.301 m3/s. The corrected discharge is used as input to a Temporal Fusion Transformer (TFT) trained on hourly meteorological data to predict streamflow at 24-, 48-, and 72-h horizons. In a semi-arid, irrigated basin in Northern Greece, the TFT achieves NSEs of 0.84, 0.78, and 0.71 and RMSEs of 0.301, 0.743, and 0.980 m3/s, respectively. Probabilistic forecasts deliver uncertainty bounds with coverage near nominal levels. In addition, the model’s built-in interpretability reveals temporal and meteorological influences—such as precipitation—that enhance predictive performance. This framework demonstrates the synergistic benefits of combining physically based modeling with state-of-the-art deep learning to support robust, multi-horizon forecasts in irrigation-influenced, data-scarce environments.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Hydrology and Watershed Management Studies · Hydrological Forecasting Using AI · Flood Risk Assessment and Management

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Department of Applied Informatics, University of Macedonia, 54636 Thessaloniki, Greece

Department of Agriculture, University of Western Macedonia, 53100 Florina, Greece

Funding

European Union’s PRIMA Research and Innovation Programme

References (53)

Show source-provided references
1. Sustainable access to safe drinking water: Fundamental human right in the international and national scene10.4136/ambi-agua.2037 ↗
2. UNGA Resolution (2010). Resolution A/RES/64/292: The Human Right to Water and Sanitation, United Nations.
3. Groundwater Quality in and Around a Landfill in Northwest China: Characteristic Pollutant Identification, Health Risk Assessment, and Controlling Factor Analysis10.1007/s12403-022-00464-6 ↗
4. Assessment of Drinking Water Sources for Water Quality, Human Health Risks, and Pollution Sources: A Case Study of the District Bajaur, Pakistan10.1007/s00244-020-00801-3 ↗
5. Overexploitation status of groundwater and induced geological hazards in China10.1007/s11069-014-1102-y ↗
6. Assessment of soil salinization based on a low-cost method and its influencing factors in a semi-arid agricultural area, northwest China10.1007/s12665-013-2736-x ↗
7. van Emmerik, T., Mulder, G., Eilander, D., Piet, M., and Savenije, H. (2015). Predicting the ungauged basin: Model validation and realism assessment. Front. Earth Sci., 3.10.3389/feart.2015.00062 ↗
8. Examining the potential of an irrigation work to improve sustainability in a rural area10.2166/ws.2021.106 ↗
9. Deep learning for precision agriculture: A bibliometric analysis
10. A Brief review of flood forecasting techniques and their applications10.1080/15715124.2017.1411920 ↗
11. Beven, K. (2012). Data for Rainfall–Runoff Modelling. Rainfall-Runoff Modelling, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.10.1002/9781119951001 ↗
12. Tackling Climate Change with Machine Learning10.1145/3485128 ↗
13. Ergüler, Z.A., Hadji, R., Chaminé, H.I., Rodrigo-Comino, J., Kallel, A., Merkel, B., Eshagh, M., Chenchouni, H., Grab, S., and Karakus, M. (2023). A Multi-layered Convolutional Neural Network for Soil Variables Estimation with the Combination of Open Access Data. Selected Studies in Geotechnics, Geo-informatics and Remote Sensing, Springer Nature.10.1007/978-3-031-43759-5 ↗
14. A three-level Multiple-Kernel Learning approach for soil spectral analysis10.1016/j.neucom.2020.01.008 ↗
15. Kalopesa, E., Karyotis, K., Tziolas, N., Tsakiridis, N., Samarinas, N., and Zalidis, G. (2023). Estimation of Sugar Content in Wine Grapes via In Situ VNIR–SWIR Point Spectroscopy Using Explainable Artificial Intelligence Techniques. Sensors, 23.10.3390/s23031065 ↗
16. A Two-Dimensional Nitrogen Fertilization Model for Irrigated Crops in Turkey
17. Continuous streamflow prediction in ungauged basins: Long short-term memory neural networks clearly outperform traditional hydrological models10.5194/hess-27-139-2023 ↗
18. Hestness, J., Narang, S., Ardalani, N., Diamos, G., Jun, H., Kianinejad, H., Patwary, M.A., Yang, Y., and Zhou, Y. (2017). Deep Learning Scaling is Predictable, Empirically. arXiv.
19. Rainfall–runoff modelling using Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) networks10.5194/hess-22-6005-2018 ↗
20. What Role Does Hydrological Science Play in the Age of Machine Learning?10.1029/2020WR028091 ↗
21. Comparative evaluation of LSTM, CNN, and ConvLSTM for hourly short-term streamflow forecasting using deep learning approaches10.1016/j.ecoinf.2023.102119 ↗
22. Performance Improvement of LSTM-based Deep Learning Model for Streamflow Forecasting Using Kalman Filtering10.1007/s11269-023-03492-2 ↗
23. A hybrid deep learning algorithm and its application to streamflow prediction10.1016/j.jhydrol.2021.126636 ↗
24. Short-Term Daily Univariate Streamflow Forecasting Using Deep Learning Models10.1155/2022/1860460 ↗
25. Streamflow forecasting with deep learning models: A side-by-side comparison in Northwest Spain10.1007/s12145-024-01454-9 ↗
26. Burrichter, B., da Silva, J.K., Niemann, A., and Quirmbach, M. (2024). A Temporal Fusion Transformer Model to Forecast Overflow from Sewer Manholes during Pluvial Flash Flood Events. Hydrology, 11.10.3390/hydrology11030041 ↗
27. Temporal Fusion Transformers for streamflow Prediction: Value of combining attention with recurrence10.1016/j.jhydrol.2024.131301 ↗
28. A Post-Processing Machine Learning Framework for Bias-Correcting National Water Model Outputs by Accounting for Dominant Streamflow Drivers10.1016/j.envsoft.2025.106459 ↗
29. Post-processing of hydrological model simulations using the convolutional neural network and support vector regression10.2166/nh.2022.004 ↗
30. Temporal Fusion Transformers for interpretable multi-horizon time series forecasting10.1016/j.ijforecast.2021.03.012 ↗
31. Interpretable multi-step hybrid deep learning model for karst spring discharge prediction: Integrating temporal fusion transformers with ensemble empirical mode decomposition10.1016/j.jhydrol.2024.132235 ↗
32. Francisco, R., Matos, J.P., Marinheiro, R., Lopes, N., Portela, M.M., and Barros, P. (2025). Application of Temporal Fusion Transformers to Run-Of-The-River Hydropower Scheduling. Hydrology, 12.10.3390/hydrology12040081 ↗
33. Forecasting environmental water availability of lakes using temporal fusion transformer: Case studies of China’s two largest freshwater lakes10.1007/s10661-024-12331-9 ↗
34. Ampas, T., and Refanidis, I. (2024). Leveraging deep learning methods to enhance hydrological predictions and model interpretability. SETN ’24, Proceedings of the 13th Hellenic Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Piraeus, Greece, 11–13 September 2024, Association for Computing Machinery.10.1145/3688671.3688788 ↗
35. Kumar, S., Choudhary, M.K., and Thomas, T. (2024). A hybrid technique to enhance the rainfall-runoff prediction of physical and data-driven model: A case study of Upper Narmada River Sub-basin, India. Sci. Rep., 14.10.1038/s41598-024-77655-5 ↗
36. Improved daily streamflow forecasting for semi-arid environments using hybrid machine learning and multi-scale analysis techniques10.2166/hydro.2024.263 ↗
37. Samarinas, N., Tziolas, N., and Zalidis, G. (2020). Improved Estimations of Nitrate and Sediment Concentrations Based on SWAT Simulations and Annual Updated Land Cover Products from a Deep Learning Classification Algorithm. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Information, 9.10.3390/ijgi9100576 ↗
38. Bias learning improves data driven models for streamflow prediction10.1016/j.ejrh.2023.101557 ↗
39. Data-driven model as a post-process for daily streamflow prediction in ungauged basins10.1016/j.heliyon.2025.e42512 ↗
40. Evaluating post-processing approaches for monthly and seasonal streamflow forecasts10.5194/hess-22-6257-2018 ↗
41. Spectral Analysis of Hourly Solar Radiation10.1007/s40710-014-0023-9 ↗
42. Ampas, V. (2010). Research and Estimation of Meteorological Parameters with Direct Impact on Agriculture. [Ph.D. Thesis, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki].
43. Allen, R.G. (2000). Crop Evapotranspiration: Guidelines for Computing Crop Water Requirements, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Repr. in FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper, No. 56.
44. New Global Hydrography Derived From Spaceborne Elevation Data10.1029/2008EO100001 ↗
45. (2019). European Union’s Copernicus Land Monitoring Service Information, European Commission. EU-Hydro River Network Database 2006–2012 (vector).
46. Mishra, S.K., and Singh, V.P. (2003). SCS-CN Method. Soil Conservation Service Curve Number (SCS-CN) Methodology, Springer.10.1007/978-94-017-0147-1 ↗
47. Storage and the Unit Hydrograph10.1061/TACEAT.0005800 ↗
48. Chow, V.T., Maidment, D.R., and Mays, L.W. (1988). Applied Hydrology, McGraw-Hill.
49. River flow forecasting through conceptual models part I—A discussion of principles10.1016/0022-1694(70)90255-6 ↗
50. Runoff conditions in the upper Danube basin under an ensemble of climate change scenarios10.1016/j.jhydrol.2012.01.011 ↗
51. Clevert, D.-A., Unterthiner, T., and Hochreiter, S. (2016). Fast and Accurate Deep Network Learning by Exponential Linear Units (ELUs). arXiv.
52. Dauphin, Y.N., Fan, A., Auli, M., and Grangier, D. (2017). Language Modeling with Gated Convolutional Networks. arXiv.
53. Akiba, T., Sano, S., Yanase, T., Ohta, T., and Koyama, M. (2019). Optuna: A Next-generation Hyperparameter Optimization Framework. arXiv.10.1145/3292500.3330701 ↗