Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Streamflow”

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.

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

At least 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2025

Dayflow-PR: High-Resolution Streamflow Reanalysis for Puerto Rico, Version 1.0

This dataset presents a high-resolution historical streamflow reanalysis for NHDPlusV2 stream reaches across Puerto Rico (PR) spanning 1950 - 2019. The reanalysis is generated using the calibrated VIC-RAPID hydrologic modeling framework at the Hydrologic Unit Code Sub-basin (HUC08) scale, forced with sub-daily and daily meteorological forcings from Daymet. Runoff is simulated on 1- and 6-km grids, and the resulting total runoff is routed through the NHDPlusV2 river network using the RAPID routing model to produce Naturalized Streamflow Reanalysis. Where complete observational records are available over 1980 - 2019, streamflows are assimilated (substituted) and subsequently routed downstream through the river network to produce Assimilated Streamflow Reanalysis. The dataset includes streamflow outputs from eight distinct hydrologic modeling configurations along with key performanc evaluation metrics at daily and monthly scales, supporting a wide range of water resource applications. This dataset is derived to support the Non-Powered Dam Assessment, as well as 9505 Secure Water Assessment projects for the US Department of Energy (DOE) Water Power Technologies Office (WPTO). For further details, refer to Ghimire et al. (2023), Kao et al. (2024), and Ghimire et al. (2025).

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2025

Streamflow Response to Glacier Mass Loss Varies With Basin Precipitation Across Alaska

Abstract Diminishing glaciers affect streamflow, and given the extent of glaciers in Alaska and adjacent Canada, continued glacier mass loss is likely to have profound effects on ecosystems sensitive to runoff. The effects of glacier mass loss on streamflow are likely to vary across the wide ranges of basin size, glacier cover, and precipitation in this region. In this study, we use U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) streamflow data with satellite‐based glacier volume change estimates to quantify how glacier mass loss subsidized streamflow over the 2000–2019 period for 116 glacierized basins. We examine interannual variability in that subsidy at three USGS‐monitored glaciers to explore the ability of the subsidy to buffer streamflow derived solely from precipitation. We found the relative importance of percent glacier cover on streamflow magnitude increases in drier basins. In the driest basins, glaciers produced 40 times greater percent glacier mass loss subsidies to streamflow for the percent glacier cover compared to the wettest basins. While the subsidy from glacier mass loss buffers interannual variability in streamflow to varying degrees, it can also increase streamflow variability. Smaller amounts of percent glacier cover are needed to produce summer‐melt‐dominated seasonal flow regimes in drier basins than in wetter basins. Decreasing glacier cover will eventually decrease summer streamflow, increasing spring streamflow in drier basins, and attenuating seasonality with increasing spring and autumnal streamflow in wetter basins. Quantifying the downstream effects of continued glacier mass loss without the computational expense of a hydrological model is broadly applicable in this changing climate.

Curran, Janet H. [U.S. Geological Survey Alaska Sc↗
DOE OSTI2025

Evaluation of CMIP6 Streamflow in the Arctic

Earth system models (ESMs) serve as the primary basis for projecting future streamflow changes, but they are biased in terms of the their ability to reproduce historical observations of streamflow. Rigorous downscaling and bias-correction procedures, which are time-consuming and introduce uncertainties, are commonly used to address these biases in streamflow or runoff. However, the applicable limits of streamflow projections remain largely untested through direct comparisons with observations. In this work, we compare historical streamflow time series observations with a suite of Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 6 (CMIP6) ESMs to assess the space and time scales at which each ESM represents historic streamflow observations. We focus our analysis on streamflow across the Arctic given the higher degree of warming experienced over this region, underscoring its importance for understanding the future changes. A series of metrics—volume, seasonality, extreme capturing streamflow variability, drought, and flooding is tested to assess ESM simulation skill for total events and overall distributions. Our results indicate that although improvements are necessary in ESM runoff and streamflow projections, the use of temporal averaging and targeting the best-fit model for comparison to observations when a suite of ESMs is considered can provide robust streamflow projections. Moreover, this work provides a basis for contextualizing the limits of ESM applicability for studies aiming to assess streamflow in the future.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2026

Mountain Basin Controls on the Snow-to-Streamflow Signal: An AIC-Weighted Multiple Linear Regression Framework

A regression-based analysis quantifies how basin characteristics modulate the snow-to-streamflow signal. First, we use the ERA5-Land reanalysis gridded product (European Centre for Medium Range Weather Forecasts reanalysis 5 -Land component) for 4,655 hydrologic unit code - 10 (HUC10) mountain basins across the western United States (US) for water years 1987–2024. Linear regressions are performed for peak snow water equivalent (SWE) and annual streamflow for each mountain basin. Models use ordinary least squares in Python’s statsmodels package. After which, an Akaike Information Criterion (AIC)–weighted ensemble multiple linear regression (MLR) framework with 47 watershed traits is used to predict the linear regression coefficient of determination (r-squared) defining the ability of peak SWE to predict annual streamflow across all mountain basin. Predictor sets are constrained to avoid multicollinearity by excluding models with variance inflation factors (VIF) greater than 5. Mountain basin traits included in the MLR include seasonal climate, topography, vegetation type and structure, and bedrock geology. Accepted models are considered if their AIC is within 2.0 of the model with the minimum AIC, or best model. To compare predictor influence across acceptable models, we computed standardized regression coefficients. To evaluate structural redundancy among models, we constructed binary inclusion vectors for each acceptable model, denoting whether a predictor was present (1) or absent (0). Core predictor variables are defined as occurring in at least 67% of the acceptable models. For this regional analysis, only one model was found acceptable, with higher snow-to-streamflow translation (higher r-squared) occurring in colder mountain basins with higher relative winter precipitation, more snow accumulation and a lower fraction of annual precipitation that falls in the spring and summer. The second component of the data package uses previously published, high-resolution output from an integrated hydrological model of the East River watershed using the U.S. Geological Survey Groundwater and Surface water Flow model (GSFLOW, doi:10.15485/1998576). East River MLR expands upon the approach described above to explore the response of five streamflow metrics—annual streamflow, runoff efficiency, 7-day minimum flow, low-flow duration, and non-perennial stream fraction to snow system indicators including peak SWE, snow-covered area, snow disappearance date, and the fraction of basin area characterized by low-to-no snow, as well as seasonal precipitation and temperature, and annual hydrologic variables representing soil moisture, evapotranspiration (ET), the partitioning of incoming precipitation to evapotranspiration (ET/P), groundwater storage, and groundwater inflow to streams. MLR was done on all water years (P0: 1987-2024) and for each period as determined in the split analysis using pooled regression techniques (P1: 1987-2011 and P2: 2012-2024) to evaluate shifting predictor variable emphasis on streamflow generation. Results indicate that since 2012, peak SWE has lost statistical strength in its prediction of annual streamflow and runoff efficiency, and the indirect influence of spring temperature has emerged as critically important. Low-flow metrics remain largely influenced by soil moisture, vegetation water use and groundwater inflows with summer precipitation becoming a direct influence on minimum summer flow. Together, these data and Python-based analysis tools provide a framework for identifying the key watershed characteristics that control how streamflow responds to snow from year to year. The package also helps quantify uncertainty in statistical models and assess how snow–streamflow relationships vary across regions and over time. This dataset contains comma-separated values files (.csv), text files (.txt), python code files (.py), figure files (.png), and shapefiles (.cpg, .dbf, .prj, .sbn, .sbx, .shp, .xml). Further details on file contents and MLR execution can be found in the readme file and the FLMD files. Work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Controls From Above and Below: Snow, Soil, and Steepness Drive Diverging Trends of Subsurface Water and Streamflow Dynamics

ABSTRACT The importance of subsurface water dynamics, such as water storage and flow partitioning, is well recognised. Yet, our understanding of their drivers and links to streamflow generation has remained elusive, especially in small headwater streams that are often data‐limited but crucial for downstream water quantity and quality. Large‐scale analyses have focused on streamflow characteristics across rivers with varying drainage areas, often overlooking the subsurface water dynamics that shape streamflow behaviour. Here we ask the question: What are the climate and landscape characteristics that regulate subsurface dynamic storage, flow path partitioning, and dynamics of streamflow generation in headwater streams? To answer this question, we used streamflow data and a widely‐used hydrological model (HBV) for 15 headwater catchments across the contiguous United States. Results show that climate characteristics such as aridity and precipitation phase (snow or rain) and land attributes such as topography and soil texture are key drivers of streamflow generation dynamics. In particular, steeper slopes generally promoted more streamflow, regardless of aridity. Streams in flat, rainy sites (< 30% precipitation as snow) with finer soils exhibited flashier regimes than those in snowy sites (> 30% precipitation as snow) or sites with coarse soils and deeper flow paths. In snowy sites, less weathered, thinner soils promoted shallower flow paths such that discharge was more sensitive to changes in storage, but snow dampened streamflow flashiness overall. Results here indicate that land characteristics such as steepness and soil texture modify subsurface water storage and shallow and deep flow partitioning, ultimately regulating streamflow response to climate forcing. As climate change increases uncertainty in water availability, understanding the interacting climate and landscape features that regulate streamflow will be essential to predict hydrological shifts in headwater catchments and improve water resources management.

Kerins, Devon [Department of Civil and Environment↗
DOE OSTI2025

Enhancing Streamflow Reanalysis Across the Conterminous US Leveraging Multiple Gridded Precipitation Data Sets

Streamflow observations, essential for various water resource applications, are often unavailable at critical locations in need. Although different models have been proposed to enhance streamflow predictability at ungauged locations, the challenge extends beyond model fidelity. Differences in meteorologic forcing data sets, precipitation in particular, can significantly affect the accuracy of hydrologic predictions. This challenge intensifies across regions characterized by diverse hydro-climatological and geographical conditions, such as in the conterminous US (CONUS) where a single precipitation product struggles to consistently replicate observed hydrographs, particularly peak flow dynamics. To enhance streamflow predictions, we utilize a VIC-RAPID hydrologic modeling framework driven by multiple commonly used meteorological forcing data sets, such as Daymet, PRISM, ST4, AORC, and their hybrids and create multiple sets of 40-year (1980–2019) hourly, daily, and monthly streamflow reanalysis, Dayflow Version 2, for 2.7 million river reaches across the CONUS. Most forcings lead to skillful streamflow performance, except for ST4 in the mountainous west, where severe radar blockage adversely affects the accuracy. The evaluation using over 6,000 hourly stream gauges shows that hourly AORC and ST4 lead to improved annual peak flow performance over Daymet—driven streamflow (Dayflow V1), particularly in smaller basins, highlighting the value of high temporal resolution forcings in hydrologic predictions. Compared with other benchmark data sets like National Water Model V3.0, AORC-driven VIC-RAPID exhibits improved regional streamflow performance, with comparable peak flow representation. We envision that multi-forcing streamflow reanalysis data can inform regions in need of forcing data enhancement, diagnose hydrologic model performance, and benefit diverse water resource applications.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

An Alternative Ensemble Streamflow Prediction Approach Using Improved Subseasonal Precipitation Forecasts from the North America Multi-Model Ensemble Phase II

In this article, streamflow forecasting at a subseasonal time scale (10–30 days into the future) is important for various human activities. The ensemble streamflow prediction (ESP) is a widely applied technique for subseasonal streamflow forecasting. However, ESP’s reliance on the randomly resampled historical precipitation limits its predictive capability. Available dynamical subseasonal precipitation forecasts provide an alternative to the randomly resampled precipitation in ESP. Prior studies found the predictive performance of raw subseasonal precipitation forecast is limited in many regions such as the central south of the United States, which raises questions about its effectiveness in assisting streamflow forecasting. To further assess the hydrologic applicability of dynamical subseasonal precipitation forecasts, we test the subseasonal precipitation forecast from North America Multi-Model Ensemble Phase II (NMME-2) at four watersheds in the central south region of the United States. The subseasonal precipitation forecasts are postprocessed with bias correction and spatial disaggregation (BCSD) to correct bias and improve spatial resolution before replacing the randomly resampled precipitation in ESP for streamflow predictions. The performance of the resulting streamflow predictions is benchmarked with ESP. Evaluation is conducted using Kling–Gupta Efficiency (KGE), continuous ranked probability score (CRPS), probability of detection (POD), false alarm ratios (FARs), as well as reliability diagrams. Our results suggest that BCSD-corrected subseasonal precipitation forecasts lead to overall improved streamflow predictions due to added skills in winter and spring. Our results also suggest that BCSD-corrected subseasonal precipitation forecasts lead to improved predictions on the occurrence of high-percentile streamflow values above 75%. Overall, BCSD-corrected subseasonal precipitation has shown promising performance, highlighting its potential broader applications for river and flood forecasting.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Novel Deep Learning Transformer Model for Short to Sub‐Seasonal Streamflow Forecast

Accurate short-to-subseasonal streamflow forecasts are becoming crucial for effective water management in an increasingly variable climate. However, streamflow forecast remains challenging over extended lead times, uncertainty in meteorological inputs, and increased frequency and variability in extreme weather and climate events. We implemented a Future Time Series Transformer (FutureTST) model for streamflow forecasting that separately integrates past meteorological and streamflow data while incorporating future weather conditions. FutureTST achieves a mean Nash-Sutcliffe Efficiency (NSE) of 0.82 to 0.67 for 1- to 30-day streamflow forecasts. Incorporating upstream streamflow information improved forecast accuracy by up to 10%. During real-time forecast, FutureTST maintains higher forecast skills of 9.03 for 1-day and 5.74 for 14-day forecasts. In contrast, calibrated process-based hydrological model forecasts become unreliable beyond a 4-day lead time. Our findings demonstrate the potential of FutureTST as a reliable streamflow forecasting tool that offers a valuable addition to operational flood monitoring systems and climate-resilient decision-making.

Ambika, Anukesh Krishnankutty [Oak Ridge National ↗
DOE OSTI2026

Near-Real-Time Statistical Analysis and Visualization of Streamflow from a Deep-Learning Rainfall-Runoff Model

Near-real-time (NRT) streamflow data are critical importance for timely water resources management. Here, we developed an open-source tool, FlowStats, for NRT streamflow analysis and visualization in Germany, based on NRT meteorological data from the German Weather Service and simulated streamflow from a long short-term memory neural network (LSTM). The LSTM model achieved very good overall performance, median NSE of 0.80 for the test period across 1,479 catchments. FlowStats provides options for deriving various streamflow statistics, from normal and abnormal streamflow detection to drought and flood analyses. An example analysis from FlowStats revealed widespread below-normal to extreme low-flow conditions across Germany from March to May 2025, which weakened from June to September 2025. Drought analysis for September 2025 highlighted severe to extreme drought conditions in northwestern Germany, while flood classifications indicated that high-flow events occurred in southwestern Germany. FlowStats can be used for various hydrological assessments to support water resources management.

Hydrological modeling↗
DOE OSTI2025

Dataset: "Widespread Drought-driven Declines in Streamflows and Water quality in the Upper Colorado River Basin (1998-2022)"

This data package contains the associated data and scripts for Nagamoto, E., Ombadi, M., Ciulla, F. et al. Widespread drought-driven declines in streamflows and water quality in the Upper Colorado River Basin during 1998-2022. Commun Earth Environ 7, 734 (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-026-03890-5. This purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of the 21st century drought on water quantity and quality at catchments throughout the Upper Colorado River Basin (UCRB). We used stream flow, water temperature, specific conductance, air temperature, precipitation, and catchment attribute data for over 200 sites in the UCRB, collected from the National Water Information System using Basin3D (Varadharajan, 2023), GAGESII (Falcone, 2010), and the Google Earth Engine. We identified years of severe drought between 1998 and 2022 using the Standardized Precipitation Evaporation Index (SPEI), then calculated the relative change percentage of the stream flow, water temperature, and specific conductance from drought versus non-drought years. We used the attribute information from GAGESII to investigate what physical traits of catchments are associated streamflow vulnerability (greater relative change) or resilience to drought. We used land cover data from the National Land Cover Database (USGS, 2024) to assess any changes to physical attributes that may not be represented in the static attributes information in GAGESII. To increase data availability, we modeled stream temperature using methods from Willard, 2023. While the study period is water years 1998 to 2022, the raw water quantity and quality data extends to 1950 and the meteorological data extends to 1980. The data and code can be downloaded via the UCRB_drought.zip. Within the zip, the files are organized as follows: - INPUTS: Contains all input data used in UCRB_Drought_Workflow.ipynb - OUTPUTS: Contains all intermediate data created from UCRB_Drought_Workflow.ipynb as well as final products including the calculated Standardized Evapotranspiration Index (SPEI) - climatic_variables: The code used to collect meteorologic data from Google Earth Engine - feature_importance: The code used for the catchment attributes analysis - preprocessing: Code used in UCRB_Drought_Workflow_Preprocessing.ipynb - pyeto: Code used in UCRB_Drought_Workflow_Preprocessing.ipynb - calculations: Code used in UCRB_Drought_Workflow_Impacts.ipynb - plotting: Code used in UCRB_Drought_Workflow_Impacts.ipynb - README.md - UCRB_Drought_Workflow_Preprocessing.ipynb: The code used to prep raw data for the analysis - UCRB_Drought_Workflow_Impact.ipynb: The code which uses the prepped raw data for analysis, and plots all figures - requirements_ucrb-drought_v2.yml: The requirements file to create a virtual environment and Jupyter Lab kernel to run the code The INPUTS folder is organized into the following major directories and sub-directories. The "RDC_WT_SC_RAW" folder contains raw data for streamflow, water temperature, and specific conductance in a ".h5" file. The "NLCD_RAW" folder contains ".csv" files with annual land cover percentages for counties within the UCRB. The "MET_RAW" folder contains a ".csv" file with monthly meteorological data (air temperature and precipitation) for the sites in the UCRB which was obtained from code in the climatic_variables folder. The "GAGESII" folder contains ".csv" files with physical catchment attribute variables for catchments across the country. The "WT_LSTM_data" folder contains ".csv" files with calculated WT (Willard, 2023) and the associated RMSEs. The "Upper_Colorado_River_Basin_Boundary" folder contains geographic data including a shapefile for plotting in the UCRB_Drought_Workflow.ipynb. The "RESERVOIRS_RAW" folder contains ".csv" files for each reservoir in the UCRB with daily reservoir storage. There are also two files in the INPUTS folder that have combined reservoir storage data and reservoir metadata. The OUTPUTS folder is organized into the following major directories and sub-directories. The "RDC_WT_SC_data" folder contains a folder "Water_year" with the associated cleaned data, metadata, and data availability information in ".csv" files, a folder "Median_Relchange" with the relative change comparing drought to non-drought years in ".csv" files, and a folder "Peak95_Min5_Relchange" that has ".csv" files for the relative change in peak (95th %) and minimum (5th %) variables. The "NLCD_data" folder contains the difference in land cover from the beginning to end of the study period and the percentage of the county that is within UCRB bounds can be found in Nagamoto et al (2025)). The "MET_data" folder contains separated monthly air temperature and precipitation data and the calculated PET in ".csv" files. The "SPEI_data" folder contains ".csv" files with calculated SPEI values (one restricted to the study period and the other with information from the entire MET data period). The "Paper_Tables" folder contains two ".csv" files containing site information and data availability and information about the GAGESII trait aggregated categories. The base directory includes the file “flmd.csv” for a list and description of all files and the file “dd.csv” for data dictionaries. Scripts for preprocessing, analysis, and figure generation are located in the associated GitHub repository found at [https://github.com/iNAIADS/drought-impacts/tree/develop/UCRB-drought]. UPDATE 1: Title and code file updated to match submitted manuscript 10-15-2025. UPDATE 2: Code and data files updated to match revised manuscript 3-4-2026. UPDATE 3: Code and data files updated to match revised manuscript 6-7-2026. ** NOTE: DD and FLMD have not been updated yet. UPDATE 4: Added associated Manuscript information and DD and FLMD have been updated. To cite this code, please use the following BibTeX: @misc{nagamoto2025drought, author = {Emily Nagamoto and Fabio Ciulla and Mohammad Ombadi and Jared Willard and Rosemary Carroll and Charuleka Varadharajan}, title = {Dataset: "Widespread Drought-driven Declines in Streamflows and Water quality in the Upper Colorado River Basin (1998-2022)"}, year = {2025}, doi = {10.15485/2551894}, publisher = {ESS-DIVE Repository}, url = {https://data.ess-dive.lbl.gov/datasets/doi:10.15485/2551894} }

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Machine Learning Classification Strategy to Improve Streamflow Estimates in Diverse River Basins in the Colorado River Basin

Streamflow in the Colorado River Basin (CRB) is significantly altered by human activities including land use/cover alterations, reservoir operation, irrigation, and water exports. Climate is also highly varied across the CRB which contains snowpack-dominated watersheds and arid, precipitation-dominated basins. Recently, machine learning methods have improved the generalizability and accuracy of streamflow models. Previous successes with LSTM modeling have primarily focused on unimpacted basins, and few studies have included human impacted systems in either regional or single-basin modeling. We demonstrate that the diverse hydrological behavior of river basins in the CRB are too difficult to model with a single, regional model. We propose a method to delineate catchments into categories based on the level of predictability, hydrological characteristics, and the level of human influence. Lastly, we model streamflow in each category with climate and anthropogenic proxy data sets and use feature importance methods to assess whether model performance improves with additional relevant data. Overall, land use cover data at a low temporal resolution was not sufficient to capture the irregular patterns of reservoir releases, demonstrating the importance of having high-resolution reservoir release data sets at a global scale. On the other hand, the classification approach reduced the complexity of the data and has the potential to improve streamflow forecasts in human-altered regions.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Hydrologic Model Data for the East Fork Poplar Creek Watershed Simulated with the Advanced Terrestrial Simulator (ATS): Streamflow and Network Expansion–Contraction Dynamics

This dataset supports hydrologic modeling and stream network expansion–contraction analysis for the East Fork Poplar Creek (EFPC) Watershed in Tennessee. It includes a Jupyter notebook for model setup, model configuration files, simulation outputs, and derived products used to evaluate model performance and investigate stream dynamics under varying hydrologic conditions. The dataset was generated using the Watershed Workflow Python package and the Advanced Terrestrial Simulator (ATS), enabling integrated surface–subsurface hydrologic simulations using a stream-aligned mesh. Outputs include high-resolution time series of streamflow, active network length, water table depth, and related hydrologic variables. Also included are spatially explicit stream persistency indices and classifications of reaches as perennial or non-perennial. These data facilitate reproducibility and support further research on stream intermittency and variability in network extent.The model data archive is organized in following directories:1) model_setup_inputsContains the Watershed Workflow Jupyter notebooks (accessed through any open source code editor), selected input datasets, and resulting ATS input files, including XML files (access through any open source code editor), computational mesh (.exo files can be viewed using Paraview), and meteorological forcing files (.h5 files can be accessed through h5py python package and HDFView open source software). 2) model_outputsIncludes ATS simulation outputs relevant to this study. Time series of spatially integrated or averaged variables (e.g., streamflow, water table depth) are provided as CSV files. Select spatial fields (e.g., ponded depth and water table depth) are saved as pickled Python objects to reduce file size, and can be accessed through pickle package in Python. Key geometry objects from Watershed Workflow—such as the surface mesh and river tree—are also included to support analysis of streamflow persistency and expansion–contraction dynamics. These files can also be accessed through Watershed Workflow Python package.3) model_evaluationProvides observed streamflow time series and field survey-based flow regime classifications used to evaluate model performance. Jupyter notebooks for processing ATS outputs and comparing model predictions with observations to build confidence in the model prior to scientific analysis are also included.4) Q_L_relationshipsContains workflows for generating time series of discharge, active network length, and related hydrologic variables used in the stream network expansion–contraction analysis. Includes routines for delineating baseflow-dominated periods. For each catchment, notebooks and processed data (as pickled DataFrames accessed through Pandas Python package) are provided. 5) figure_scriptsProvides the Jupyter notebooks used to generate the figures presented in the paper.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Temporal sequence transformer to advance long-term streamflow prediction

Accurate streamflow prediction is crucial for understanding climate change impacts on water resources and for effective management of extreme hydrological events. While Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) networks have been the dominant data-driven approach for streamflow forecasting, recent advancements in transformer architectures for time series tasks have shown promise in outperforming traditional LSTM models. This study introduces a transformer-based model that integrates historical streamflow data with climatic variables to enhance streamflow prediction accuracy. We evaluated our transformer model against a benchmark LSTM across five diverse basins in the United States. Results demonstrate that the transformer architecture consistently outperforms the LSTM model across all evaluation metrics, highlighting its potential as a more effective tool for hydrological forecasting. This research contributes to the ongoing development of advanced AI techniques for improved water resource management and climate change adaptation strategies.

Singh, Ruhaan [Farragut High School]↗
DOE OSTI2025

The Role of Bedrock Circulation Depth and Porosity in Mountain Streamflow Response to Prolonged Drought

Quantitative understanding is lacking on how the depth of active groundwater circulation in bedrock affects mountain streamflow response to a multi-year drought. We use an integrated hydrological model to explore the sensitivity of a variety of streamflow metrics to bedrock circulation depth and porosity under a plausible extreme drought scenario lasting up to 5 years. Endmember depth versus hydraulic conductivity relationships and porosity values for fractured crystalline rock are simulated. With drought, a deeper circulation system with higher drainable porosity more effectively buffers minimum flow and significantly limits perennial stream loss in comparison to a shallow circulation system. Streamflow buffering is accomplished through extensive groundwater storage loss. However, deeper circulation systems experience prolonged recovery from drought in comparison to storage-limited shallow systems. Research highlights the importance of characterizing the deeper bedrock hydrogeology in mountainous watersheds to better understand and predict drought impacts on stream ecosystem health and water resource sustainability.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

A Mass Conservation Relaxed (MCR) LSTM Model for Streamflow Simulation Across CONUS

The recent development of the physics-aware Mass-Conserving Long Short-Term Memory network (MC-LSTM) provides an alternative to other data-driven Deep Learning (DL) models in hydrology. Mass-Conserving Long Short-Term Memory incorporates mass conservation directly into the LSTM architecture. Despite the theoretical advancements, studies have reported a surprisingly limited performance of the MC-LSTM in streamflow simulation. We hypothesize that such a limitation is due to the unrealistic mass conservation scheme in MC-LSTM, which overlooks unobserved incoming water fluxes beyond precipitation. As an attempt to verify this hypothesis, we propose a Mass Conservation Relaxed LSTM (MCR-LSTM), which incorporates a bi-directional mass relaxation (MR) component to account for potential incoming water fluxes beyond precipitation. We train and test the proposed MCR-LSTM model across 531 watersheds in the contiguous United States (CONUS) against three baseline models: the Sacramento Soil Moisture Accounting, LSTM, and MC-LSTM. Our results show that MCR-LSTM outperforms MC-LSTM despite its underperformance compared to LSTM. Specifically, MCR-LSTM's advantage over MC-LSTM is mainly seen in the Plains and Western U.S., where the newly incorporated MR component better simulates water loss and suggests the likely existence of additional incoming water fluxes beyond precipitation, respectively. The novelty and contribution of this study are twofold: firstly, it introduces an alternative physics-aware DL tool (i.e., MCR-LSTM) in hydrology with higher accuracy in specific regions compared to MC-LSTM. Secondly, it provides a diagnosis of regions where strict, precipitation-based mass conservation constraints may be unrealistic in streamflow simulation.

deep learning↗
DOE OSTI2025

Synthetic Streamflow Datasets Derived from DOE 9505 for Select Texas Basins

This dataset is generated using a Bayesian Hidden Markov Model trained on the DOE 9505 streamflow projection ensemble. A set of 21,000 streamflow realizations are generated for the Colorado, Sabine, and Trinity river basins in Texas. Separate models are trained either using the full 9505 ensemble or a subset based on three hyperparameters: bias correction, downscaling, and hydrological model.

drought↗
DOE OSTI2026

FFTSF: Revisiting Sub-Seasonal Streamflow Forecasting with Simple Feedforward Network

Accurate short-to-subseasonal streamflow forecasts are vital for water management, including flood preparedness, drought mitigation, hydropower scheduling, and ecosystem protection. However, extending a forecast beyond a few days remains challenging due to complexity of hydrological processes. While recent self-attention based transformer architectures such as iTransformer have gained traction in time-series forecasting, these models suffer from several critical limitations: (1) significant computational overhead that scales quadratically with sequence length, (2) vulnerability to overfitting on limited hydrological datasets, (3) degraded performance on long-horizon forecasts due to attention decay, and (4) excessive architectural complexity that hampers interpretability and operational deployment. In this study, we propose a simple Feedforward Time Series Forecasting (FFTSF) network that directly addresses these limitations through its lightweight architecture and long-range forecasting capabilities. We evaluate FFTSF across 178 USGS stream gauges spanning diverse climate regimes by forecasting lead times of 1-, 7-, 14-, and 30-days. Our results demonstrate that FFTSF achieves competitive performance at short lead times (NSE of 0.778 for 1-day forecasts) while substantially outperforming complex baselines at longer forecast period, achieving the highest NSE (0.271) at 30-day forecasts with greater robustness and stability. For 30-day forecasts, FFTSF achieves a 71% improvement over NLinear, 57% improvement over DLinear and 12% improvement over the computationally intensive iTransformer while requiring fewer computational resources. Our findings reveal that architectural complexity is not necessary for hydrological forecasting, demonstrating that well-designed simple models can outperform attention mechanisms for subseasonal streamflow forecasting. The computational efficiency and consistent long-range performance of FFTSF make it suitable for water management applications where reliable extended forecasts are essential.

Krishnan Kutty Ambika, Anukesh [ORNL] (ORCID:00000↗
DOE OSTI2024

Self-potential tomography preconditioned by particle swarm optimization—Self-potential monitoring and streamflow data acquired March 26–September 14, 2023 at East Fork Poplar Creek near Oak Ridge Tennessee

This data release contains self-potential (SP) monitoring data measured on the flood plain of East Fork Poplar Creek (East Fork) in Oak Ridge, Tennessee and streamflow data measured at streamgage EFK5.4 about 310 meters upstream from the SP monitoring site. Additionally, forward and inverse numerical modeling scripts used to model the electrical-potential field on the East Fork flood plain are provided. SP monitoring data included in this data release were measured at 39 different data-collection points on the east flood plain; 30 points were spaced 3-m apart along an 87-m profile parallel to the edge of the streambank, and 9 points were spaced 5-m apart along a 40-m profile approximately perpendicular to the streambank. The two profiles of SP data-collection points intersected at the approximate midpoint of the profile parallel to the streambank. Transient voltages were measured at each data-collection point every 60 seconds between 16:13 Eastern Standard Time (EST) on March 26, 2023, and 11:41 EST on September 14, 2023. Streamflow data included in this data release overlap the time-period of self-potential monitoring and were measured every 900 seconds between 16:23 on March 26, 2023, and 23:53 on September 14, 2023.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗