- Abstract
- Today, with the surge of remote and in-situ observation platforms and the capacity to integrate disparate data sources (structured and unstructured) into big data, new data-driven approaches are attracting much “hype” despite their apparent limitations (transparency and interpretability) (Mitchell, 2021). Among these approaches, off- the-shelf readily applicable Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML) software are popularizing the use of these tools in hydrology among the specialists and non-specialists. A quick review of research publications (Mendeley database) in the last decade (Fig. 1) shows a rapid (10-fold increase from 2012-2016 to 2017-2021) in “novel applications” of AI and ML methods in water. While some of these research works can be an important addition to the hydrological field, some are lacking in addressing explicitly important hydrological questions and often focus only on “black- box” prediction without providing mechanistic insights of the water systems studied.
What are the advantages of new AI/ML technology compared to existing mechanistic or statistical tools? What its limitations? When to choose this over established mechanistic methods for the same problem? What are the uncertainties associated with AI/ML and how to deal with them?
Not answering these questions adds more complexity to the process of choosing the correct tool to solve specific hydrological problems, provokes ”Disillusionment” (Figure 1) and affects the delay in the correct adoption (“Production” in Fig. 1) of AI/ML as one more tool within the extensive statistical and mechanistic “hydrologic tool chest”. Alber et al. (2019) noted that multiscale, physics- based modeling and ML approaches interact at both the parameter and system level. At the parameter level, the interaction assists with “...constraining parameter spaces, identifying parameter values, and analyzing sensitivity.” At the system level, the interaction is beneficial for “...exploiting the underlying physics, constraining design spaces, and identifying system dynamics.” Unfortunately, instead of an integrated approach, too often one or the other approaches are used.
In this opinion, we first provide a typology of hydrological problems and examples, and use this to identify current (statistical and other) tools commonly used today, standing challenges in their application, and finally envision ways to address these challenges to improve hydrological practice in the context of emerging and pressing challenges we face today. Our discussion is a “bird’s view” approach that will necessarily miss many key details, but we hope it will help advance our current view of the challenges faced and a discussion on potential solutions.
- Presented by
- Rafa Munoz-Carpena
- Institution
- Agricultural and Biological Engineering, UF/IFAS