Preprints
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-3466
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-3466
22 Jul 2026
 | 22 Jul 2026
Status: this preprint is open for discussion and under review for Hydrology and Earth System Sciences (HESS).

Quantification of Data and Model Uncertainty for Deep Learning-based Streamflow Prediction

Kaidi Peng, Daniel B. Wright, Lei Yan, G. Aaron Alexander, and Yagmur Derin

Abstract. Accurate and timely flood warnings are essential for reducing flooding risks. Achieving this objective requires both accurate data and careful model parameterization. The absence of high-resolution ground-based precipitation observations in many locations leaves relatively low-accuracy satellite-based precipitation products as one of the few alternatives. At the same time, advancements in deep learning-based flood prediction have led to improvements in both accuracy and computational efficiency. Despite the progress made by integrating satellite-based precipitation data and a deep learning-based hydrologic model, the quantification of uncertainty—stemming from both data and model—remains largely unexamined. This gap results in less reliable predictions, as overfitting and limited explainability are common concerns in deep learning. In this paper, uncertainties arising from satellite-based precipitation inputs, streamflow observations, training data variability, and model parameters are jointly addressed. The basin-averaged precipitation uncertainty is represented by a parametric probabilistic distribution function, whose parameters can be inferred from the deep learning-based hydrologic model, without the need for higher-accuracy precipitation “ground truth”. Streamflow observation uncertainty is characterized by a multiplicative Gaussian noise. Training data variability is quantified by using a mixture density network, while uncertainty in model parameters is captured through variational inference. Our results demonstrate that this integrated approach to uncertainty quantification enhances both the prediction accuracy and the explainability of ensemble streamflow predictions. It provides a foundation for “uncertainty-aware” deep learning-based streamflow prediction.

Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this paper. While Copernicus Publications makes every effort to include appropriate place names, the final responsibility lies with the authors. Views expressed in the text are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher.
Share
Kaidi Peng, Daniel B. Wright, Lei Yan, G. Aaron Alexander, and Yagmur Derin

Status: open (until 02 Sep 2026)

Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor | : Report abuse
Kaidi Peng, Daniel B. Wright, Lei Yan, G. Aaron Alexander, and Yagmur Derin
Kaidi Peng, Daniel B. Wright, Lei Yan, G. Aaron Alexander, and Yagmur Derin
Metrics will be available soon.
Latest update: 22 Jul 2026
Download
Short summary
Accurate flood predictions save lives, but many areas lack ground-based rain gauges, and the calibration of the flood models heavily relies on data accuracy. The uncertainties in data and models make the streamflow prediction unreliable. This paper introduces an uncertainty-aware prediction system. It accounts for uncertainties from satellite rainfall, streamflow data, and the model itself without needing perfect rainfall data. This approach can generate more reliable streamflow predictions.
Share