the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Enhancing Long-Term Reservoir Inflow Forecasting: An Integrated Approach Combining Switch Prediction Method, Ensemble Rainfall Forecasts, and Machine Learning Techniques
Abstract. This study makes a unique contribution by evaluating the effectiveness of the Switch Prediction Method (SPM) in integrating ensemble rainfall forecasts, significantly improving the accuracy of long-term inflow forecasting for reservoirs—a crucial aspect of hydrological forecasting. The proposed approach combines Numerical Weather Prediction (NWP) data with advanced machine learning techniques, specifically Support Vector Machine (SVM) and Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) models, to develop a robust forecasting framework. The study utilizes comprehensive datasets from the ShihMen Reservoir in Taiwan to assess the performance of the proposed model. The SPM dynamically integrates multiple meteorological forecasts to reduce uncertainty and improve rainfall input accuracy. These enhanced inputs are then used in multi-step forecasting (MSF) models with a 72-hour lead time. The results demonstrate that the LSTM-based model, combined with SPM-integrated forecasts, delivers accurate and stable inflow predictions. For instance, in the case of Typhoon Soudelor—the test event with the highest observed peak inflow (5,634.1 cms)—the proposed SPM-LSTM-MSF model achieved a Mean Absolute Error (MAE) of 178.8 cms and a Coefficient of Efficiency (CE) of 0.87, demonstrating superior accuracy and temporal stability compared to the SVM-based approach. These findings highlight the potential of SPM and machine learning techniques in enhancing reservoir management and flood control strategies, offering a robust and adaptable solution for complex hydrological forecasting tasks.
- Preprint
(2654 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (extended)
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2025-2703', Anonymous Referee #1, 22 Sep 2025
reply
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Hsuan-Yu Lin, 25 Apr 2026
reply
We have provided a detailed point-by-point response in the attached PDF file. Please refer to the supplementary document for the complete revision details.
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Hsuan-Yu Lin, 25 Apr 2026
reply
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2025-2703', Anonymous Referee #1, 12 Apr 2026
reply
Overall comments
The manuscript presents an interesting and practical framework for long-term reservoir inflow forecasting by integrating the Switch Prediction Method (SPM) with machine learning models. The topic is relevant, especially for typhoon-prone regions such as Taiwan, and the study shows potential contribution to operational hydrology.
However, several issues related to clarity, methodological consistency, and presentation should be addressed before publication.
Abstract
The abstract is informative; however, it would benefit from a more concise and consistent presentation of results. It is recommended to report only the best-performing model with representative numerical values to improve clarity.
Introduction
The objective of the study is generally clear; however, the novelty is not sufficiently emphasized. Please revise the objective section to clearly state:
-what is new in this study
-how it differs from existing ensemble or ML-based approaches
It may be helpful to explicitly highlight the contribution of integrating SPM with MSF and machine learning models.
Methodology
The manuscript would benefit from improved reproducibility. It is recommended to include a pseudo-code or algorithmic flow for the proposed framework (SPM + MSF + ML models).
Results and Discussion
The results are well presented; however, the discussion lacks comparison with existing studies. It is recommended to include comparison statements with previous research to better position the contribution of this work.
The manuscript does not explicitly discuss the advantages and limitations of the proposed framework.
It is recommended to add a dedicated discussion including:
-strengths (e.g., adaptability, uncertainty reduction)
-limitations (e.g., data dependency, lack of extrapolation capability)
Conclusion and Future Work
The conclusion summarizes the findings well; however, future research directions are only briefly mentioned.
Please expand the future scope section, including:
-application to other watersheds
-real-time forecasting
Figures and Tables
Please ensure that all figures are properly cited and clearly indicate whether they are original or adapted from other sources.
References
Please carefully review all references to ensure they are relevant and closely related to the study.
The use of non-peer-reviewed sources (e.g., websites) is not recommended and should be avoided.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2703-RC2 -
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Hsuan-Yu Lin, 25 Apr 2026
reply
We have provided a detailed point-by-point response in the attached PDF file. Please refer to the supplementary document for the complete revision details.
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Hsuan-Yu Lin, 25 Apr 2026
reply
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5,960 | 706 | 184 | 6,850 | 214 | 269 |
- HTML: 5,960
- PDF: 706
- XML: 184
- Total: 6,850
- BibTeX: 214
- EndNote: 269
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
The manuscript addresses an important problem in hydrology and water resources management. The integration of ensemble rainfall forecasts with the Switch Prediction Method (SPM) and machine learning techniques is relevant, and the ShihMen Reservoir case study provides a solid application context. The methodological framework is clearly presented, and the paper is generally well organized. These are important strengths of the study.
Nevertheless, there are several areas where improvements would help to increase the clarity, novelty, and broader impact of the work:
1. Research novelty not sufficiently highlighted
Although the Abstract and Introduction provide a comprehensive description of the study background and methodology, the novelty of the proposed approach compared with existing methods is not clearly articulated. I recommend that the authors strengthen the concluding part of both sections by explicitly stating the uniqueness of this study and clarifying how the proposed framework improves upon conventional approaches. This will better highlight the scientific contribution.
2. Outdated references
The list of references added by the authors appears to rely heavily on older studies. A scientific article should also reflect the state-of-the-art. It is recommended to include more recent literature and to provide a review of previous research on similar issues to enhance the timeliness and relevance of the study.
3. Insufficient technical details of SPM
The Switch Prediction Method (SPM) is only briefly described, making it difficult for readers to fully understand its operational mechanism. More details are needed. This will also help ensure reproducibility.
4. Limited discussion on practical implications
The Discussion and Conclusion are focused mainly on the technical aspects of the model. However, the practical significance for reservoir operation remains underdeveloped. It is suggested to elaborate on how 72-hour inflow forecasts—even with certain errors—can still provide critical lead time for reservoir managers to adjust release strategies and enhance operational safety. This would substantially strengthen the applied value of the study.
5. Future research directions too narrowly technical
The future work outlined in the Conclusion mainly emphasizes model improvement. To broaden the impact, the authors should consider including wider perspectives such as cross-basin applicability, feasibility under climate change conditions, or hybridization with physically-based models. This would enhance the forward-looking dimension of the paper and its relevance to a broader research community.