Skip to main content
Log in

The impact assessments of the ACF shape on time series forecasting by the ANFIS model

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Neural Computing and Applications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Time series modelling and control of hydrological parameters are the most critical issues in water resources management. The subject matter of this study is finding the significant relationship between natural properties of time series like correlogram and selecting the best combination set of inputs for the fuzzy-neural adaptive network model. In this regard, two different types of the ACF, including sinusoidal and descending shapes, are considered in different climate. Selecting model inputs from the stability range of the ACF diagram for any shape types and model fine tuning lead to inferior results in testing stage. The best R-value of the original temperature and groundwater time series in stability range is 0.2 (|SI|= 1.23, RMSE = 11.91) and 0.2 (SI = 0.14, RMSE = 3.32), respectively. When they choose from the non-stationary range of the ACF, the powerful results for sinusoidal and descending ACF shapes would be achieved. In case, the R-value is more than 94% (|SI|< 0.57, 2.57 < RMSE < 5.5]) and 78% (SI = 0.03 and RMSE = 0.71), respectively. Whether they are picked up from the absolute maximum of ρ value in the ACF diagram, the best model results would have appeared. By applying the inverse of standardization and reforming the shape of the descending ACF to sinusoidal form, R-value is upgraded about 18%, from 78 to 96% the case. Finally, using preprocessing, in particular, standardization on time series does not always lead to improve forecasting model accuracy, but it depends on the shape of the ACF diagram. If it has the sine periodic shape, applying this action leads to poor results. In opposite, by descending ACF shape, using the inverse of standardization can improve the model accuracy in case. Finally, choosing ANFIS model inputs using the ACF diagram and appropriate input sets are more effective than using the model tuning and different fuzzy generators.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Khashei M, Rezvan MT, Hamadani AZ, Bijari M (2013) A bi-level neural-based fuzzy classification approach for credit scoring problem. Complexity 18(6):46–57

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. Kousari MR, Zarch MAA, Ahani H, Hakimelahi H (2013) A survey of temporal and spatial reference crop evapotranspiration trends in Iran from 1960 to 2005. Clim Change 120(1):277–298

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Chen W, Panahi M, Khosravi K, Pourghasemi HR, Rezaie F, Parvinnezhad D (2019) Spatial prediction of groundwater potentiality using ANFIS ensembled with teaching-learning-based and biogeography-based optimization. J Hydrol 572:435–448

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Mirzavand M, Khoshnevisan B, Shamshirband S, Kisi O, Ahmad R, Akib S (2015) Evaluating groundwater level fluctuation by support vector regression and Neuro-Fuzzy methods: a comparative study. Nat Hazards 1(1):1–15

    Google Scholar 

  5. Maiti S, Tiwari RK (2014) A comparative study of artificial neural networks, Bayesian neural networks and adaptive Neuro-Fuzzy inference system in groundwater level prediction. Environ Earth Sci 71:3147–3160

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Gong Y, Zhang Y, Lan S, Wang H (2016) A comparative study of artificial neural networks, support vector machines and adaptive neuro fuzzy inference system for forecasting groundwater levels near Lake Okeechobee, Florida. Water Resour Manag 30:375–391

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Verma AK, S TN, (2013) Prediction of water quality from simple field parameters. Environ Earth Sci 69:821–829

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Daneshmand H, Tavousi T, Khosravi M, Tavakoli S (2015) Modelling minimum temperature using adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system based on spectral analysis of climate indices: a case study in Iran. J Saudi Soc Agric Sci 14(1):33–40

    Google Scholar 

  9. Azad A, Manoochehri M, Kashi H, Farzin S, Karami H, Nourani V, Shiri J (2019) Comparative evaluation of intelligent algorithms to improve adaptive Neuro-Fuzzy inference system performance in precipitation modelling. J Hydrol 571:214–224

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Zare M, Koch M (2018) Groundwater level fluctuations simulation and prediction by ANFIS- and hybrid Wavelet-ANFIS/Fuzzy C-Means (FCM) clustering models: application to the Miandarband plain. J Hydro-Environ Res 18:63–76

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Emamgholizadeh S, Moslemi K, Karami G (2014) Prediction of the groundwater level of Bastam Plain (Iran) by artificial neural network (ANN) and adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system (ANFIS). Water Resour Manag 28(15):5433–5446

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Yoon H, Jun SC, Hyun Y, Bae GO, Lee KK (2011) A comparative study of artificial neural networks and support vector machines for predicting groundwater levels in a coastal aquifer. J Hydrol 396(1):128–138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Moeeni H, Bonakdari H, Fatemi SE, Zaji AH (2017) Assessment of stochastic models and a hybrid artificial neural network-genetic algorithm method in forecasting monthly reservoir inflow. INAE Lett 2:13–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Moeeni H, Bonakdari H, Fatemi SE (2017) Stochastic model stationarization by eliminating the periodic term and its effect on time series prediction. J Hydrol 547:348–364

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Affandi AK, Watanabe K (2007) Daily groundwater level fluctuation forecasting using soft computing technique. Nat Sci 5(2):1–10

    Google Scholar 

  16. Bisht D, Shilpa J, Mohan RM (2013) Prediction of water table elevation fluctuation through fuzzy logic & artificial neural networks. Int J Adv Sci Technol 51:107–119

    Google Scholar 

  17. Güldal V, Tongal H (2010) Comparison of recurrent neural network, adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system and stochastic models in E˘girdir lake level forecasting. Water Resour Manage 24:105–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Amutha R, Porchelvan P (2011) Seasonal prediction of groundwater levels using ANFIS and Radial basis neural network. Geol Earth Environ Sci 1:98–108

    Google Scholar 

  19. Shirmohammadi B, Moradi H, Moosavi V, TaieSemiromi M, Zeinali A (2013) Forecasting of meteorological drought using Wavelet-ANFIS hybrid model for different time steps (case study: Southeastern part of east Azerbaijan province, Iran). Natural Hazards 96(1).

  20. Nourani V, Kisi Ö, K M, (2011) Two-hybrid Artificial Intelligence approaches for modelling rainfall–runoff process. J Hydrol 402:41–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Nadiri A, Shokri S, Tsai F, Moghaddam A (2018) Prediction of effluent quality parameters of a wastewater treatment plant using a supervised committee fuzzy logic model. J Clean Prod 180(7):539–549

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Wan J, Huang M, Ma Y, Guo W, Wang Y, Zhang H, Li WSX (2011) Prediction of effluent quality of a paper mill wastewater treatment using an adaptive network-based fuzzy inference system. Appl Soft Comput 11(3):3238–3246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Najah A, El-Shafie A, Karim O, El-Shafie A (2014) Performance of ANFIS versus MLP-NN dissolved oxygen prediction models in water quality monitoring. Environ Sci Poll Res 21(3):1658–1670

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Darbandi S, Arvanaghi H (2009) Air temperature estimation using artificial intelligent methods (Case study: Maragheh City). Eur J Sci Res 61(2):290–298

    Google Scholar 

  25. Wayan S, Azizan Abu S (2020) Rainfall prediction by using ANFIS time series technique in South Tangerang, Indonesia. Geodesy Geodyn 11(6):411–417

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Gonzalez Del Cerro RT, Subathra MSP, Manoj Kumar N, Verrastro S, Thomas George S (2020) Modelling the daily reference evapotranspiration in semi-arid region of South India: A case study comparing ANFIS and empirical models. Inf Proc Agric 8(1):173–184

    Google Scholar 

  27. Aparecido LE, Moraes J, Meneses K, Torsoni GB, Fausto de Lima R, Costa C (2020) Köppen-Geiger and Camargo climate Classifications for the Mid-West of Brasil. Theoret Appl Climatol 142(4):1133–1145

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Salas JD, Delleur JW, Yevjevich V, Lane WL (1980) Applied modeling of hydrologic time series. Water resource Publications, Colorado

    Google Scholar 

  29. Moeeni H, Bonakdari H, Ebtehaj I (2017) Integrated SARIMA with s. Water Resour Manage 31:2141–2156

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Seyed Ehsan Fatemi.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Fatemi, S.E., Parvini, H. The impact assessments of the ACF shape on time series forecasting by the ANFIS model. Neural Comput & Applic 34, 12723–12736 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-022-07140-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-022-07140-5

Keywords

Navigation