2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.compag.2018.03.010
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evapotranspiration estimation using four different machine learning approaches in different terrestrial ecosystems

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
73
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
4
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 132 publications
(74 citation statements)
references
References 82 publications
1
73
0
Order By: Relevance
“…At present, the majority of regression models are based on vegetation indices (Glenn et al, 2010), such as NDVI and enhanced vegetation index (EVI), because of their simplicity, resilience in the presence of data gaps, utility under a wide range of conditions and connection with vegetation transpiration capacity (Maselli et al, 2014;Nagler et al, 2005;Yuan et al, 2010). As an alternative to statistical regression methods, machine learning algorithms have been gaining increased attention for ET estimation for their ability to capture the complex nonlinear relationships between ET and its controlling factors (Dou and Yang, 2018). Many conventional machine learning algorithms, such as artificial neural networks, random forest, and support vector machine based algorithms have been applied in various ecosystems (Antonopoulos et al, 2016;Chen et al, 2014;Feng et al, 2017;Shrestha and Shukla, 2015) and have proved to be more accurate in estimating ET than simple regression models (Antonopoulos et al, 2016;Chen et al, 2014;Kisi et al, 2015;Shrestha and Shukla, 2015;Tabari et al, 2013).…”
Section: Vi-based Empirical Algorithms and Machine Learning Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…At present, the majority of regression models are based on vegetation indices (Glenn et al, 2010), such as NDVI and enhanced vegetation index (EVI), because of their simplicity, resilience in the presence of data gaps, utility under a wide range of conditions and connection with vegetation transpiration capacity (Maselli et al, 2014;Nagler et al, 2005;Yuan et al, 2010). As an alternative to statistical regression methods, machine learning algorithms have been gaining increased attention for ET estimation for their ability to capture the complex nonlinear relationships between ET and its controlling factors (Dou and Yang, 2018). Many conventional machine learning algorithms, such as artificial neural networks, random forest, and support vector machine based algorithms have been applied in various ecosystems (Antonopoulos et al, 2016;Chen et al, 2014;Feng et al, 2017;Shrestha and Shukla, 2015) and have proved to be more accurate in estimating ET than simple regression models (Antonopoulos et al, 2016;Chen et al, 2014;Kisi et al, 2015;Shrestha and Shukla, 2015;Tabari et al, 2013).…”
Section: Vi-based Empirical Algorithms and Machine Learning Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A similar approach was done by Zhang et al [122] in China where they extended the application of remote sensing data in the BPNN and the ANFIS for estimating ET 0 . Further studies were done to include more artificial intelligence models such as the M5 tree model, bagging, random forest [5], ELM [123], and boosted tree [124]. However, the accuracy of these studies was constrained by the quality of the images for retrieving the estimated meteorological data.…”
Section: Ensemble Models For Remote Sensingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The traditional machine learning method has been examined, with the goal of improving performance in filling gaps in flux tower observation-based regional ET and potential ET [24][25][26]. As a data-driven method, an artificial neural network has the potential to be used to obtain temporally continuous ET based on limited ET estimates from the Ts-VI triangle model [27].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%