SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Daily streamflow simulation”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

24 records · Page 2

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2023

Groundwater and Surface Water Flow (GSFLOW) model files for the East River, Colorado

The data package contains model input files and executables for the East River, Colorado (750 km2) located in the headwaters of the Upper Colorado River Basin. The code applied is the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Groundwater and Surface Water Flow (GSFLOW) model. The model contains a 100-m grid resolution to represent topographic complexity and a daily timestep accounts for energy and water partitioning between the snowpack, vegetation, soil zone and bedrock. The land surface model is dynamically linked to a three-dimensional groundwater flow model that allows for streamflow gaining and losing conditions. The groundwater model accounts for nine stratigraphic units and extends 400 m below land surface. Using this modeling framework we explore historical water budgets (water year 1987-2022) and the influence of seasonal warming and associated mechanisms driving groundwater declines and streamflow loss. A Readme_062424.txt file provides instructions on how to download all files. Input and output files are provided for the historical simulation representative of water years 1987 to 2022 (i.e. baseline) and the all-year +4C warming scenario. Instructions are provided to run the seasonal warming scenarios with warming applied only to the autumn, winter, spring or summer months. Modeled output used in figures for Carroll et al., 2024 are also provided with metadata describing where these data were obtained. This dataset additionally includes a file-level metadata (flmd.csv) file that lists each file contained in the dataset with associated metadata; and a data dictionary (dd.csv) file that contains column/row headers used throughout the files along with a definition, units, and data type.Updated on 06-24-2024: The dataset was updated to include model outputs (updated base.zip and 4C.zip files), figure source files (Figure_Source_Files.zip), an updated Readme file (Readme_062424.txt), climate input files (climate_input_files.zip), and the adoption of ESS-DIVE File Level Metadata and CSV reporting formats (inclusion of flmd.csv and dd.csv files).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2025

High‐Resolution National‐Scale Water Modeling Is Enhanced by Multiscale Differentiable Physics‐Informed Machine Learning

Abstract The National Water Model (NWM) is a key tool for flood forecasting, planning, and water management. Key challenges facing the NWM include calibration and parameter regionalization when confronted with big data. We present two novel versions of high‐resolution (∼37 km 2 ) differentiable models (a type of hybrid model): one with implicit, unit‐hydrograph‐style routing and another with explicit Muskingum‐Cunge routing in the river network. The former predicts streamflow at basin outlets whereas the latter presents a discretized product that seamlessly covers rivers in the conterminous United States (CONUS). Both versions use neural networks to provide a multiscale parameterization and process‐based equations to provide a structural backbone, which were trained simultaneously (“end‐to‐end”) on 2,807 basins across the CONUS and evaluated on 4,997 basins. Both versions show great potential to elevate future NWM performance for extensively calibrated as well as ungauged sites: the median daily Nash‐Sutcliffe efficiency of all 4,997 basins is improved to around 0.68 from 0.48 of NWM3.0. As they resolve spatial heterogeneity, both versions greatly improved simulations in the western CONUS and also in the Prairie Pothole Region, a long‐standing modeling challenge. The Muskingum‐Cunge version further improved performance for basins >10,000 km 2 . Overall, our results show how neural‐network‐based parameterizations can improve NWM performance for providing operational flood predictions while maintaining interpretability and multivariate outputs. The modeling system supports the Basic Model Interface (BMI), which allows seamless integration with the next‐generation NWM. We also provide a CONUS‐scale hydrologic data set for further evaluation and use.

Song, Yalan [Civil and Environmental Engineering T↗

DOE OSTI2023

Using Data-Driven Prediction of Downstream 1D River Flow to Overcome the Challenges of Hydrologic River Modeling

Methods for downstream river flow prediction can be categorized into physics-based and empirical approaches. Although based on well-studied physical relationships, physics-based models rely on numerous hydrologic variables characteristic of the specific river system that can be costly to acquire. Moreover, simulation is often computationally intensive. Conversely, empirical models require less information about the system being modeled and can capture a system’s interactions based on a smaller set of observed data. This article introduces two empirical methods to predict downstream hydraulic variables based on observed stream data: a linear programming (LP) model, and a convolutional neural network (CNN). We apply both empirical models within the Colorado River system to a site located on the Green River, downstream of the Yampa River confluence and Flaming Gorge Dam, and compare it to the physics-based model Streamflow Synthesis and Reservoir Regulation (SSARR) currently used by federal agencies. Results show that both proposed models significantly outperform the SSARR model. Moreover, the CNN model outperforms the LP model for hourly predictions whereas both perform similarly for daily predictions. Although less accurate than the CNN model at finer temporal resolution, the LP model is ideal for linear water scheduling tools.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2026

Knowledge-guided graph machine learning for spatially distributed prediction of daily discharge and nitrogen export dynamics

Spatially distributed prediction of streamflow and nitrogen export dynamics is essential for precision management of agricultural watersheds. While temporal deep learning models such as Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) have shown strong performance at basin scales, their ability to generalize spatially is limited by insufficient representation of spatial dependencies and flow paths, particularly under data-scarce conditions. To address this gap, we propose HydroGraphNet, a knowledge-guided graph machine learning framework that integrates process-based knowledge and explicit spatial learning into temporal modeling. This framework incorporates directed graph topology to encode watershed connectivity and upstream inflows, with mass balance constraints to improve physical consistency. To enhance generalization in sparsely monitored regions, HydroGraphNet is pretrained on synthetic data generated by the SWAT+ (Soil and Water Assessment Tool Plus) model. We evaluated HydroGraphNet in the Upper Sangamon River Basin (44 HUC-12 subwatersheds, 2001–2020) against two LSTM baselines: a lumped basin-level model and a distributed variant. When benchmarked on SWAT+ simulations in pretraining, HydroGraphNet improved test NSEs by 8.9% (discharge) and 13.7% (NO₃–N load) in temporal extrapolation, and by 27.1% and 34.7% in spatial extrapolation, relative to the Lumped LSTM baseline. After fine-tuning with USGS monitoring data, the model achieved mean test NSE (KGE) scores of 0.768 (0.861) for discharge and 0.626 (0.664) for NO₃–N load, substantially outperforming baselines. Attribution analysis further highlighted the importance of upstream inflow representation and graph-based spatial learning in capturing cross-subwatershed dependencies. The model also reproduced seasonal hydrological and biogeochemical patterns consistent with known processes, demonstrating its robustness and process fidelity for spatially distributed prediction. Altogether, HydroGraphNet advances the integration of physical knowledge and spatially explicit learning in hydrological modeling, offering a generalizable framework for distributed modeling to support spatially targeted water quality management in data-scarce watersheds.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2023

The suitability of differentiable, physics-informed machine learning hydrologic models for ungauged regions and climate change impact assessment

As a genre of physics-informed machine learning, differentiable process-based hydrologic models (abbreviated as δ or delta models) with regionalized deep-network-based parameterization pipelines were recently shown to provide daily streamflow prediction performance closely approaching that of state-of-the-art long short-term memory (LSTM) deep networks. Meanwhile, δ models provide a full suite of diagnostic physical variables and guaranteed mass conservation. Here, we ran experiments to test (1) their ability to extrapolate to regions far from streamflow gauges and (2) their ability to make credible predictions of long-term (decadal-scale) change trends. We evaluated the models based on daily hydrograph metrics (Nash–Sutcliffe model efficiency coefficient, etc.) and predicted decadal streamflow trends. For prediction in ungauged basins (PUB; randomly sampled ungauged basins representing spatial interpolation), δ models either approached or surpassed the performance of LSTM in daily hydrograph metrics, depending on the meteorological forcing data used. They presented a comparable trend performance to LSTM for annual mean flow and high flow but worse trends for low flow. For prediction in ungauged regions (PUR; regional holdout test representing spatial extrapolation in a highly data-sparse scenario), δ models surpassed LSTM in daily hydrograph metrics, and their advantages in mean and high flow trends became prominent. In addition, an untrained variable, evapotranspiration, retained good seasonality even for extrapolated cases. The δ models' deep-network-based parameterization pipeline produced parameter fields that maintain remarkably stable spatial patterns even in highly data-scarce scenarios, which explains their robustness. Combined with their interpretability and ability to assimilate multi-source observations, the δ models are strong candidates for regional and global-scale hydrologic simulations and climate change impact assessment.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2026

Data, model inputs, and analysis scripts associated with a manuscript on stream intermittency controls across spatial scales in Pacific Northwest watersheds

NOTE: The manuscript associated with this data package is currently in review. The data may be revised based on reviewer feedback. Upon manuscript acceptance, this data package will be updated with the final dataset and additional metadata. This data package is associated with the manuscript "Hydroclimatic Memory and Watershed Template Shape Stream Intermittency: Multi-scale Attribution Using Process-based Simulation and Explainable ML" by Niroula et al. (2026), submitted to Water Resources Research (WRR). The study investigates the dominant controls on stream intermittency across local, reach, and watershed scales using a coupled process-based simulation and explainable machine-learning framework. Long-term daily simulations from the Advanced Terrestrial Simulator (ATS) were used to generate wetness states and ponded-depth responses over river-corridor cells. These ATS outputs were then aggregated across scales and used to train XGBoost (eXtreme Gradient Boosting) models. SHAP (SHapley Additive exPlanations) was applied to quantify the relative importance of hydroclimatic forcings, watershed template attributes, and antecedent-memory effects in shaping intermittency behavior. The analysis is carried out for three contrasting Pacific Northwest watersheds: Oak Creek (OCW), American River Watershed (ARW), and H.J. Andrews (HJA). Across these testbeds, the package contains ATS-ready watershed inputs, ATS run configuration and selected output files, model-evaluation data products, intermittency-analysis datasets, machine-learning target-feature tables, SHAP outputs, and notebooks used to organize, analyze, and visualize results. At a high level, the package documents a workflow in which ATS provides the physically based simulation backbone and explainable machine learning is used as a post-processing attribution tool. The contents are intended to support interpretation of the manuscript figures and results, provide context for how intermittency metrics were generated at multiple scales, and preserve the key artifacts needed to understand and reuse the analysis workflow. The package contains a high-level directory summary file (`summary.txt`) and four main content folders (1) `evaluation_plots` contains evaluation figures and supporting evaluation datasets; (2) `intermittency_plots` contains intermittency-focused analysis notebook and prepared datasets; (3) `ml-training-and-shap_values_plots` contains ML training inputs, SHAP outputs, and figure-generation notebooks; and (4) `watershed_mesh_and_ats_input` contains ATS model setup materials, forcing inputs, geometry, and selected run files. More specifically, the `evaluation_plots` folder contains the notebook used for ATS evaluation plotting and site-specific evaluation datasets. These include evapotranspiration and water-balance products for three watersheds, as well as an Oak Creek field-measurement discharge file. The `intermittency_plots` folder contains the notebook used for intermittency analysis and the prepared datasets used to analyze intermittent and non-intermittent wetness behavior across the study watersheds. The `ml-training-and-shap_values_plots` folder contains notebooks and outputs for the machine-learning and explainability workflow. This includes the main XGBoost and SHAP notebook(s), a beeswarm plotting notebook, target-feature tables for machine-learning training, SHAP summary tables, and per-sample SHAP value archives. The `watershed_mesh_and_ats_input` folder contains ATS-related watershed inputs and supporting materials. This includes mesh and shape products, ATS-readable LAI and meteorological forcing inputs, selected ATS spinup and transient-run files, and a watershed workflow example notebook. Subdirectories are organized by watershed where applicable.All files are .cpg (codepage files), .csv (comma-separated values), .dbf (database files), .exo (Exodus mesh format), .h5 (HDF5 format), .ipynb (Jupyter notebooks), .pkl (Python pickle), .prj (projection files), .sh (shell scripts), .shp (shapefile geometry), .shx (shapefile index), .txt (text files), or .xml (markup data).

Advanced Terrestrial Simulator↗