The hydrological model calibration is a challenging task, especially in ungauged catchments. The regionalization calibration methods can be used to estimate the parameters of the model in ungauged sub-catchments. In this article, the model of ungauged sub-catchments is calibrated by a regionalization approach based on automatic clustering. Under the clustering procedure, gauged and ungauged sub-catchments are grouped based on their physical characteristics and similarity. The optimal number of clusters is determined using an automatic differential evolution algorithm-based clustering. Considering obtained five clusters, the value of the silhouette measure is equal to 0.56, which is an acceptable value for goodness of clustering. The calibration process is conducted according to minimizing errors in simulated peak flow and total flow volume. The Storm Water Management Model is applied to calibrate a set of 53 sub-catchments in the Gorganrood river basin. Comparing graphically and statistically simulated and observed runoff values and also calculating the value of the silhouette coefficient demonstrate that the proposed methodology is a promising approach for hydrological model calibration in ungauged catchments.

  • The model of ungauged sub-catchments is calibrated by a regionalization approach based on automatic clustering.

  • The optimal number of clusters is determined using an automatic differential evolution algorithm-based clustering.

  • Comparing graphically and statistically simulated and observed runoff values and also calculating the value of silhouette coefficient proved the superiority of automatic clustering differential evolution in clustering.

The hydrological models, as a theoretical representation of the real hydrologic cycle, can be employed for the prediction of surface runoff caused by heavy rainfalls (Bemmoussat et al. 2021). Based on the results of hydrological models, the time, location, and scale of floods can be estimated (Xin et al. 2019), and this valuable information can be used for flood risk management in general and for flood forecasting and warning systems, in particular. Applying the hydrological models in flood control projects generally requires the estimation of model parameters through calibration and validation with observed data (Madsen 2003; Valipour 2017). The parameters of hydrological models are tuned based on the physical characteristics of the basin, the available data, and information. Their identification is essential for direct runoff hydrograph estimation (Bardossy 2007; Ghumman et al. 2011). There are many cases where the estimate of hydrological parameters is required for locations for which streamflow data have not been measured (Burn & Boorman 1993). In the ungauged catchments, a small number of observations or even the absence of observations of key variables that influence hydrological processes limits the applicability of rainfall–runoff models. Early attempts have simply used the parameter values derived for neighboring catchments where streamflow data are available (Mosley 1983; Vandewiele & Elias 1995; Wagener et al. 2007). According to a survey of the literature, the clustering technique appears to be a promising research tool for prediction in ungauged basins, model parameterization, and catchment development and management. Clustering means the act of partitioning a dataset into groups called clusters, such that similar objects are placed in the same group (Pratima & Nimmakanti 2012). The clustering approach provides parameters transferring from gauged to similar ungauged catchments. Similarity can be defined based on physical properties like slope and land use (Oudin et al. 2008; Samaniego et al. 2010; Samuel et al. 2011) and geomorphological attributes of the catchments such as catchment's form (Merz & Blöschl 2004; Heuvelmans et al. 2006; Wagener et al. 2007; Bastola et al. 2008). This approach, the effectiveness of which depends on the choice of attributes for the similarity of catchments, identifies a donor catchment that is most similar to an ungauged and then transfers a parameter set from the donor to the corresponding ungauged catchment for hydrological modeling. Therefore, the rainfall–runoff simulation model can be carried out in ungauged catchments using the parameters of the gauged catchment with hydrologically similar attributes (Arsenault & Brissette 2016). This would avoid the need to calibrate the model everywhere, saving time and computer resources and enabling model use in ungauged catchments (Singh et al. 2016). Different clustering approaches have been applied to catchment regionalization on long-term and short-term time scales including monthly (Kahya & Demirel 2007; Sharghi et al. 2018; Pagliero et al. 2019; Zamoum & Souag-Gamane 2019), daily (Ding & Haberlandt 2017; He & Molkenthin 2021; Mosavi et al. 2021), and hourly (Sengupta et al. 2018) with the regionalization target of the hydrological model parameter, observed streamflow, as well as hydrological signature.

In most previous studies, the number of clusters was defined based on researchers’ knowledge about the study region, the results of studies conducted in that area, or short data availability which is not necessarily optimal. The number of clusters used in grouping data has a substantial effect on the results of regionalization. However, this fact was not considered by the researchers in clustering-based methodologies previously proposed for model regionalization in ungauged catchments.

The objective of this article is to present a methodology for the calibration of hydrological models in ungauged catchments based on automatic clustering. The proposed calibration method is used for the parameter setting of a short-term flood forecasting model in basins with low data availability. Short-term flood forecasting model calibration has not been studied in previous works. For this purpose, EPA Storm Water Management Model (SWMM5) is used as the rainfall–runoff simulation model in a basin with several gauged and ungauged sub-catchments, and an automatic clustering differential evolution (ACDE) algorithm was developed to regionalize the characteristics of gauged sub-catchments to ungauged areas. The possibility of using the proposed method for calibrating the short-term rainfall–runoff models in basins with low data is one of the most important advantages of the developed method. As another advantage, the optimal number of clusters can be automatically determined. Although the proposed method works well, there are challenges in its implementation. Determining the criteria of subcategory similarities for clustering is one of the challenges of this study. To overcome this problem, this study proposed an automatic clustering method based on optimization to find the optimal number of clusters. The similarity indices were finally defined based on the available physical and geological information and engineering judgments. Here, the clustering techniques are used for model calibration. If the sub-catchments grouped in a cluster are all ungauged, it would not be possible to determine the calibration parameters in that cluster and therefore develop a rainfall–runoff model with fully calibrated sub-catchments. To overcome this challenge, a constraint is defined in the optimization problem so that each obtained cluster includes at least one gauged sub-catchment. The applicability of the proposed methodology is investigated in the Gorganrood river basin, in northern Iran, an area prone to devastating flash floods (Omidvar & Khodaei 2008). The details of the proposed methodology are demonstrated in Section 2.

A schematic diagram of the proposed method is shown in Figure 1. In this methodology, first rainfall and runoff data in gauged catchments are collected. Then, a local sensitivity analysis is performed to determine the most effective parameters for the amount of surface runoff. The observed dataset and the effective parameters are used to perform hydrological model calibration in gauged sub-catchments. Then, for parameter estimation in ungauged catchments, the physical characteristics of all sub-catchments are extracted from the relevant maps and documents to develop a clustering approach. The results of the clustering approach are applied to determine similar gauged and ungauged sub-catchments. Then after, the parameters of ungauged sub-catchments in each cluster are estimated using the calibrated parameters of gauged sub-catchments. Finally, a rainfall–runoff model is obtained with fully calibrated sub-catchments. The main parts of the diagram including data preparation, rainfall–runoff simulation, and data clustering are presented with details in Sections 2.1–2.3.
Figure 1

Diagram of the proposed methodology.

Figure 1

Diagram of the proposed methodology.

Close modal

Data preparation

In a catchment, there are various flood events in which rainfall and runoff data are usually recorded in several sub-catchments. In some cases, there may be several sub-catchments where no data had been recorded. To resolve the problem of lack of observational data in ungauged sub-catchments, various spatial interpolation techniques can be employed (Chen & Liu 2012). Geographical and non-geographical statistics, nearest neighbor, Thiessen polygons, inverse distance weighting (IDW), and the Kriging method (Lam 1983; Jeffrey et al. 2001; Yeh et al. 2011) are some of the most popular techniques (Yakowitz & Karlsson 1987; Dirks et al. 1998; Chen & Liu 2012). In this study, the IDW technique, as a widely interpolation method in hydrology (Robinson & Metternicht 2006), is applied to calculate areal rainfall in all sub-catchments. Furthermore, since the sub-catchments that are similar in physical characteristics have similar hydrological behavior (Oudin et al. 2010), the physical characteristics of all sub-catchments were collected from the relevant maps and documents. The physical characteristics include slope (derived from the digital elevation model), land use (extracted from the land-use map produced by available multispectral satellite data), soil type (obtained from data based on soil survey classifications), geological nature data (produced by the geological map that is constructed from observations), shape factor (calculated by the following formula: the sub-catchment width divided by the maximum overland flow length), and Gravilious coefficient (defined as the ratio of the basin perimeter to the hypothetical circular perimeter whose area is equal to the area of the catchment). This information is essential in classifying measured and unmeasured sub-catchments.

SWMM, a rainfall–runoff simulation model

The EPA SWMM5 is a dynamic rainfall–runoff simulation model first developed in 1971 and widely used for a single-event and long-term (continuous) simulation of the rainfall–runoff process (Rossman 2010). Multiple abilities in this model make it appropriate to simulate various hydrological characteristics of the catchment, such as surface runoff, transport through the streams, storage, and receiving water effects (Huber et al. 1988; Wang & Altunkaynak 2012).

SWMM is a widely used open-source model available for planning, analysis, and design related to stormwater runoff in urban as well as nonurban drainage systems (Kim et al. 2015). The major advantage of SWMM is its capability to incorporate both hydrological and hydraulic models. This model can present water depth by numerically solving Saint-Venant equations in rivers and floodplains, which makes it suitable for flood studies. Moreover, a calibrated and validated SWMM model is much easier to use for accurate flood prediction as it requires only minimal meteorological data like temperature and rainfall (Rai et al. 2017). Furthermore, unlike the widely used conceptual Hydrologic Engineering Center - Hydrologic Modeling System (HEC-HMS) model, by using the SWMM model for flood routing in the river, flood depth is obtained at different points. Although the SWMM model was developed for urban applications, it is successfully used to model nonurban areas and natural watersheds by researchers (Jang et al. 2007; Jun et al. 2010; Chung et al. 2011).

In the SWMM model, there are various methods to represent the hydrological processes of a catchment including, rainfall losses, surface runoff hydrographs, flow routing, and groundwater flow. Here, the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) method has been applied to calculate precipitation losses due to its simplicity and fewer required parameters. The runoff hydrograph estimation of the sub-catchments in this model is done physically based on the continuity equation and Manning formula over time. The computational runoff hydrograph of sub-catchments in this model can be routed inside the rivers by solving kinematic or dynamic waves. In this research, routing by the dynamic wave method has been used due to its higher accuracy.

Sensitivity analysis and calibration

Sensitivity analysis is performed to establish the most sensitive parameters affecting the amount of surface runoff. This is done by varying the tested parameter over a practical range while keeping the rest of the parameters unchanged (Zaghloul 1983).

Hydrologic models are typically used in stormwater applications to estimate the discharge characteristics of a catchment, based on the contributing rainfall and the hydrologic attributes of the catchment. The characteristics of a catchment are represented in a model by parameters and relationships that are used to estimate the response of the catchment. Most models have several parameters that can be directly measured or observed (e.g. area of the catchment, percent imperviousness) as well as parameters that are not directly observable (e.g. parameters that define groundwater flow). Parameters that are not directly observable must be estimated using indirect techniques of matching the model output with historical measured data. The process of adjusting model parameters is called calibration or parameter estimation (Gupta et al. 1999).

SWMM requires tuning a set of parameters to sufficiently express the complex relationship between rainfall and surface runoff. Model parameters involve impervious percentage, roughness coefficient of impervious surfaces, curve number (CN), and roughness coefficient of pervious surfaces in sub-catchments. A sensitivity analysis with a local method (Saltelli 2002) is performed to obtain information about collinearity among parameters and a ranking of influence. The less-effective parameters are given a fixed value, and for the remaining ones, calibration is performed through the trial-and-error method.

Automatic clustering technique based on DE

Clustering is known as one of the most challenging problems in machine learning, due to its unknown structural characteristics. Also, clustering can be formally considered a particular kind of optimization problem for the regionalization of catchments (Acreman & Sinclair 1986; Lin & Chen 2006; Ramachandra Rao & Srinivas 2006; Sadri & Burn 2011; Ahani & Mousavi Nadoushani 2016; Ahani et al. 2020). The two most widely studied clustering algorithms are partitional and hierarchical clustering. Partitional clustering algorithms require a set of initial clusters that are then improved iteratively while there is no need to specify the initial cluster centers for hierarchical clustering algorithms (Reddy & Vinzamuri 2018). It is one of the major advantages of the hierarchical algorithms for the regionalization of the catchments (Ahani et al. 2020).

In many previous studies, the number of clusters is either assumed to be known or specified by the user (MacQueen 1967; Tu et al. 2014; Zhang et al. 2017), while determining the appropriate number of clusters in a clustering problem is a challenging issue that requires sufficient prior knowledge (Salvador & Chan 2004). To address this problem, numerous heuristic approaches have been suggested over the years. A popular approach to solving clustering problems is applying evolutionary algorithms (EAs). EAs are widely believed to be effective in clustering problems to provide near-optimal solutions in a reasonable time (Hruschka et al. 2009).

In some previous studies, EAs have been used to solve clustering problems with a known or predefined number of clusters (Bezdek et al. 1994; Fränti et al. 1997; Maulik & Bandyopadhyay 2000; Bandyopadhyay & Maulik 2002; Lu et al. 2004; Sheng & Liu 2004; Ma et al. 2006; Nayak et al. 2016; Hancer et al. 2020), whereas fewer studies addressed the EAs to optimize the number of clusters (k) and the corresponding partitions (Hruschka & Ebecken 2003; Liu et al. 2004; Hruschka et al. 2006; Lensen et al. 2017; Viloria & Lezama 2019).

Clustering methods have been applied in hydrological regionalization to identify similar catchments (Ramachandra Rao & Srinivas 2006), classify the flow regime of streams (Moliere et al. 2009), define types of waters in terms of water quality (McNeil et al. 2005; Panda et al. 2006), group climate stations toward determination of climatic regions (Raju & Kumar 2007), and determine similar hydrological behavior concerning simulated water balances of hydrological response units (Bormann et al. 1999). In many studies, the number of clusters has been predetermined or selected through an iterative process. In real-world clustering problems, determining the optimal number of clusters is a challenge. Therefore, automatic clustering approaches are recommended due to their flexibility and effectiveness.

As an alternative approach, automatic clustering can be used in which metaheuristic algorithms are utilized to find the global optimum of the clustering problem (Bhattacharya & Guojun 2003; Das et al. 2009; Hu et al. 2012; Maier et al. 2019). The application of automatic clustering methods in various fields of water engineering such as drainage pipe monitoring points design (Guo et al. 2018), groundwater remediation systems development (Vali et al. 2021), and hydrograph clustering (Wunsch et al. 2022) is expanding, but has not been reported in the calibration of ungauged catchments. In this study, the optimal number of clusters is determined using an automatic clustering optimization technique that has not been seen in previous works. In contrast to most of the existing clustering techniques, the proposed algorithm requires no prior knowledge of the data to be classified. Rather, it determines the optimal number of clusters on the run. This approach was first presented by Das et al. (2009) for image processing and recognition. In this study, the approach extends to hydrological application.

Correctness of clustering can be evaluated quantitatively with a global validity index like the Davies–Bouldin's measure (Davies & Bouldin 1979) or CS measure (Chou et al. 2004). The theory of automatic clustering used in this study is borrowed from the study by Das et al. (2008) and is done as follows:

Assume is a dataset in a d-dimensional space that is to be clustered. To achieve this goal, an optimization problem is defined. The cluster centers and the number of clusters are decision variables in the optimization problem and are obtained using automatic clustering. The objective function is formulated as follows:
(1)
where
(2)
(3)

In the aforementioned equations, CS is a validity measure for automatic clustering, is the maximum number of clusters, represents the optimal obtained clusters, and the cluster centroid is obtained by averaging the data of each cluster. The Euclidean distance between each point and its cluster center is denoted by . As can be seen, CS is a function of the ratio of the sum of within-cluster scatter to between-cluster separation. It focuses on increasing the cluster separation and increasing cohesion (decreasing the distance between members) in each cluster. The minimum value of CS indicates the appropriate partitions.

This is a nonlinear and nonconvex optimization problem and can be solved by one of the EAs. Here, the differential evolution (DE) algorithm is chosen because DE has emerged as one of the fast, robust, and efficient global search EAs of current interest (Das et al. 2008).

Optimization solver

DE (Storn & Price 1995) is a population-based metaheuristic search algorithm proposed to solve unconstrained global optimization problems by iteratively improving a candidate solution based on an evolutionary process. The advantage of DE compared to GA is its strong global search operator (Hegerty et al. 2009). Concerning the classical optimization methods, the weakness of DE like many other EAs is local search capabilities (Alizadeh et al. 2018). DE is composed of five steps: initialization, mutation, crossover, selection, and repetition. These steps are briefly summarized as follows (Storn & Price 1997):

Initialization: Generate the initial population from candidate responses:

Mutation: Generate a trial solution y, where i is the index of the decision variable, and a, b, and c are randomly selected from the population for each member in the population.

Crossover: Generate new solution z as follows:
(4)
where ri is a random value in the interval [0,1], and Pcr is crossover probability.

Selection: Select the value with the smaller objective function value.

Repetition: Repeat steps 2–4 until the desired convergence criterion is reached.

Clustering validation

Cluster validation is a technique to evaluate the goodness of clustering algorithm results. There are three classes of cluster validation: internal, external, and relative cluster validation (Halkidi et al. 2001). Different types of indices are used to evaluate different types of clustering problems, and index selection depends on the kind of available data. Furthermore, external indices require previous knowledge to assess the results of a clustering problem, whereas internal indices do not (Rendón et al. 2011). Silhouette coefficient (Rousseeuw 1987), as a popular internal cluster validation index, is a measurement of how similar the points are to their clusters (cohesion) compared to other clusters (separation). This measure is described as follows:

Assume that the dataset is clustered into k clusters by a clustering method. For data point in the cluster , the mean distance between i and all other data points in the same cluster is defined as follows:
(5)
where is the number of points belonging to cluster iand is the distance between data points i and j in the cluster . The mean dissimilarity of point i in the cluster to any other cluster (), of which i is not a member is defined as as follows:
(6)
here, a silhouette (value) of one data point i is defined as follows:
(7)
and
(8)

The silhouette is the mean of all output values s(i) and it ranges from −1 to +1, where the value of −1 means that clusters have been assigned in the wrong way. A score of 1 indicates that the object is well matched to its cluster and poorly matched to neighboring clusters. The silhouette score reaching closer to 1 implies that the clustering configuration is appropriate.

The Gorganrood catchment is located in the north-east of Iran and lies between the latitudes of 36° 30′ and 37° 50′ N and the longitudes of 54° 5′ and 56° 30′ E. The total area of the catchment is 11,380 km2. About 59.5% of the Gorganrood catchment is mountainous areas and 40.5% is foothills and plains. Sixty-seven percent of the Golestan province's yearly surface water, i.e. 828 million cubic meters, flows in this catchment. Topographically, the Gorganrood catchment has a mountainous area and flat land. The surface elevation of the area ranges between –30 and 3,662 m. The mean annual precipitation in the study area is 615 mm (Rahmati et al. 2016), which is about three times the average annual rainfall in Iran. The main land-use types are water body, range, irrigated agriculture, dryland agriculture, low forest, and dense forest. The upper part of the catchment is mainly covered by forest and pasture, and the lower part is the area under cultivation (Rahmati et al. 2016).

The mainstream length of the Gorganrood river catchment is 350 km, which flows in the general east-west direction in the north of the Gorgan–Gonbad plain. Numerous branches, which are mostly in the south-north direction, join the mainstream and finally flow into the Gulf of Gorgan. The geological maps of the basin show that about 65% of the sub-catchments have high permeability, and the permeability of the rest is average.

The Gorganrood catchment is a region prone to devastating flash floods (Omidvar & Khodaei 2008). Among the devastating floods in this area, we can refer to the floods that occurred in July 2005 and April 2019, in which 40 and 10 people were killed and financial losses were estimated at 20 and 175 million dollars, respectively. Figure 2 shows images of the historical events and flood damages in this catchment. In this research, recorded rainfalls of several important flood events at rain gauges and associated observed hydrographs at hydrometric gauges have been used for the calibration and validation of the SWMM model. Table 1 presents information on considered flood events. The location of the stations is also shown in Figure 3. Also, the images of the typical river cross sections in hydrometric stations are shown in Figure 4 (Water Research Institute (WRI) 2011).
Table 1

Flood events used for calibration and validation

Hydrometric gaugeCalibration eventDuration (h)Validation eventDuration (h)
Khormaloo 10/20/2011 24 9/6/2012 24 
Arazkooseh 2/2/2012 61 5/14/2007 72 
Baghesalian 6/20/2012 67 10/23/2011 96 
Tangrah 8/10/2001 76 8/9/2005 36 
Hajighoshan 10/8/2005 55 2/22/2010 18 
Galikesh 8/9/2005 24 4/16/2016 27 
Ghochmaz 8/25/2011 36 2/22/2010 12 
Tamar 8/9/2005 24 9/18/2004 39 
Hydrometric gaugeCalibration eventDuration (h)Validation eventDuration (h)
Khormaloo 10/20/2011 24 9/6/2012 24 
Arazkooseh 2/2/2012 61 5/14/2007 72 
Baghesalian 6/20/2012 67 10/23/2011 96 
Tangrah 8/10/2001 76 8/9/2005 36 
Hajighoshan 10/8/2005 55 2/22/2010 18 
Galikesh 8/9/2005 24 4/16/2016 27 
Ghochmaz 8/25/2011 36 2/22/2010 12 
Tamar 8/9/2005 24 9/18/2004 39 
Figure 2

Typical images of severe flood events in the Gorganrood catchment: (a) July 2005 and (b) April 2019.

Figure 2

Typical images of severe flood events in the Gorganrood catchment: (a) July 2005 and (b) April 2019.

Close modal
Figure 3

Gorganrood catchment and its hydrometric gauges.

Figure 3

Gorganrood catchment and its hydrometric gauges.

Close modal
Figure 4

The river cross section in hydrometric gauges: (a) hydrometric gauge: Tamar and (b) hydrometric gauge: Hajighoshan.

Figure 4

The river cross section in hydrometric gauges: (a) hydrometric gauge: Tamar and (b) hydrometric gauge: Hajighoshan.

Close modal
The results of the sensitivity analysis revealed that the impervious percentage is the most effective parameter on the peak flood discharge of the catchment outlet. Other effective parameters are the roughness coefficient of impervious surfaces, CN, and roughness coefficient of pervious surfaces. The detailed results of the sensitivity analysis are presented in Table 2. In this study, the SWMM model has been calibrated manually by adjusting impervious percentage (%Impervious), CN, Manning's N values for the impervious and pervious areas of the sub-catchment (N-impervious and N-pervious, respectively) for the flood events observed in eight hydrometric gauges. The calibration parameters were tuned within their defined practical range. To evaluate the calibration efficiency, the obtained calibrated parameters have been served in the model to simulate other recorded flood events as the validation task. To assess the calibrated parameters, simulated hydrographs are compared with observed ones. Comparing both graphically and statistically confirms the calibration results. Observed and simulated hydrographs in the calibration and verification processes are depicted in Figures 5 and 6, respectively. To compare the simulated and observed hydrographs, statistical metrics including R, root-mean-square error (RMSE), Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE), and mean absolute error (MAE) were considered. These metrics and their values are tabulated in Table 3 for the calibration and verification datasets, respectively. The ideal value for R and NSE is one and for the rest, is zero.
Table 2

Sensitivity analysis of hydrological modeling and ranking the effective parameters on peak flood discharge

Parameter of sensitivity analysisInitial valueVariation rangeThe maximum increase in peak flood discharge (%)The maximum decrease in peak flood discharge (%)Difference between the previous two columnsSensitivity analysis rank based on the previous column
CN 70 55–90 4.55 −1.82 6.37 
%Impervious 25 5–35 20.45 −81 101.45 
Dstore-pervious 0.05 0.01–0.15 0.05 0.45 0.4 
N-pervious 0.1 0.03–0.2 −0.45 0.1 0.55 
Slope Dependent on each catchment −50 to 200% 0.18 0.54 0.36 
N-impervious 0.01 0.005–0.02 6.82 −9.09 15.91 
Parameter of sensitivity analysisInitial valueVariation rangeThe maximum increase in peak flood discharge (%)The maximum decrease in peak flood discharge (%)Difference between the previous two columnsSensitivity analysis rank based on the previous column
CN 70 55–90 4.55 −1.82 6.37 
%Impervious 25 5–35 20.45 −81 101.45 
Dstore-pervious 0.05 0.01–0.15 0.05 0.45 0.4 
N-pervious 0.1 0.03–0.2 −0.45 0.1 0.55 
Slope Dependent on each catchment −50 to 200% 0.18 0.54 0.36 
N-impervious 0.01 0.005–0.02 6.82 −9.09 15.91 
Table 3

Statistical metrics for comparing the model results with observations, where n is the number of observations, represents the model output, denotes observed data, and indicates the average observed data

CriteriaFormulationCalibrationVerification
Correlation coefficient ( 0.86 0.84 
RMSE  44.15 19.81 
NSE  0.59 0.35 
MAE  26.78 12.84 
CriteriaFormulationCalibrationVerification
Correlation coefficient ( 0.86 0.84 
RMSE  44.15 19.81 
NSE  0.59 0.35 
MAE  26.78 12.84 
Figure 5

Observed and simulated flood hydrographs in various hydrometric gauges for different flood events used for SWMM calibration.

Figure 5

Observed and simulated flood hydrographs in various hydrometric gauges for different flood events used for SWMM calibration.

Close modal
Figure 6

Observed and simulated flood hydrographs in various hydrometric gauges for different flood events used for verifying the results of SWMM calibration.

Figure 6

Observed and simulated flood hydrographs in various hydrometric gauges for different flood events used for verifying the results of SWMM calibration.

Close modal

According to Figures 5 and 6, a graphical comparison between observed and simulated flood hydrographs at eight hydrometric gauges in various flood events indicates that flood hydrographs are relatively well simulated by the model, especially for the peak discharge. In this study, depending on the specific model application, the simulation of peak discharge has been considered as the main objective function of calibration that takes priority over the flood volume simulation. Therefore, obtaining the general hydrograph shape is acceptable as an estimate of the discharge volume simulation. It is worth mentioning that in some verification events, such as 14 May 2007 (Arazkooseh gauge), 23 October 2011 (Baghesalian gauge), and 16 April 2016 (Galikesh gauge), the difference between simulated and observed flood volume is related to the existence of ruptures in some parts of recorded hyetograph and incomplete precipitation data in these events. Generally, according to Table 4, the results of model calibration and validation confirm the satisfactory accuracy of model calibration.

Table 4

SWMM model parameters for ungauged sub-catchments

ClusterNumber of gauged sub-catchmentsNumber of ungauged sub-catchmentsSWMM model parameters for ungauged sub-catchments
CN%ImpN-perviousN-impervious
Cluster 1 57 12 0.03 0.02 
Cluster 2 64 19 0.06 0.01 
Cluster 3 19 58.8 11.02 0.064 0.018 
Cluster 4 15 59.47 14.73 0.11 0.01 
Cluster 5 57.5 6.1 0.13 0.02 
ClusterNumber of gauged sub-catchmentsNumber of ungauged sub-catchmentsSWMM model parameters for ungauged sub-catchments
CN%ImpN-perviousN-impervious
Cluster 1 57 12 0.03 0.02 
Cluster 2 64 19 0.06 0.01 
Cluster 3 19 58.8 11.02 0.064 0.018 
Cluster 4 15 59.47 14.73 0.11 0.01 
Cluster 5 57.5 6.1 0.13 0.02 

There are 53 sub-catchments in the Gorganrood catchment. Parameters of 24 gauged sub-catchments from the total sub-catchments have been obtained during the calibration procedure by simulating flood hydrographs in the mentioned eight hydrometric stations.

Parameters of the other 29 ungauged sub-catchments have been estimated based on the characteristics of similarly calibrated sub-catchments through the application of the ACDE algorithm. By implementing this algorithm, five clusters were obtained. The number of gauged and ungauged sub-catchments of each cluster is given in Table 4. In Figure 6, similar sub-catchments have been depicted in a colorful map of the whole catchment. The model parameters for ungauged sub-catchments are calculated by averaging the calibrated parameters of gauged sub-catchments in their clusters.

As mentioned in Section 2, the silhouette coefficient has been considered to assess the goodness of clustering. Considering obtained five clusters, the value of the silhouette measure is equal to 0.56. According to the silhouette ranges (from −1 to +1), 0.54 is an acceptable value that indicates the goodness of clustering.

As shown in Figure 7, the depicted clusters have a degree of spatial coherency. By referring to the available data on the physical and geological characteristics of sub-catchments, it is observed that the sub-catchments located in each cluster are significantly similar, especially in terms of land use, soil type, and slope. This means that the value of each physical and geological characteristic of the sub-basins located in each cluster changes within a limited period. To clarify this, the range of changes (minimum and maximum), the average, and the standard deviation of each variable in the obtained clusters are presented in Tables 5 and 6.
Table 5

The range of changes (minimum and maximum) of physical and geological characteristics in obtained clusters

ClusterSlope (degree)%ImpCNN-pervN-imp
Cluster 1 17–21 12–12 75–75 0.1–0.1 0.01–0.01 
Cluster 2 5–17 19–19 64–64 0.06–0.06 0.01–0.01 
Cluster 3 1–13 5.1–13 56–77 0.03–0.2 0.01–0.01 
Cluster 4 10–23 5–28 55–65 0.04–0.2 0.005–0.03 
Cluster 5 36–44 5.2–7 57–58 0.07–0.19 0.01–0.03 
ClusterSlope (degree)%ImpCNN-pervN-imp
Cluster 1 17–21 12–12 75–75 0.1–0.1 0.01–0.01 
Cluster 2 5–17 19–19 64–64 0.06–0.06 0.01–0.01 
Cluster 3 1–13 5.1–13 56–77 0.03–0.2 0.01–0.01 
Cluster 4 10–23 5–28 55–65 0.04–0.2 0.005–0.03 
Cluster 5 36–44 5.2–7 57–58 0.07–0.19 0.01–0.03 
Table 6

The average standard deviation of physical and geological characteristics in obtained clusters

ClusterSlope (degree)%ImpCNN-pervN-imp
Cluster 1 19–2 12–0 75–0 0.1–0 0.01–0 
Cluster 2 10–6 19–0 64–0 0.06–0 0.01–0 
Cluster 3 6–4 10.42–1.35 68–3 0.07–0.03 0.01–0 
Cluster 4 17–4 14.7–6.5 59–3 0.11–0.05 0.01–0.005 
Cluster 5 28–5 6.1–0.9 57–0.5 0.13–0.06 0.02–0.01 
ClusterSlope (degree)%ImpCNN-pervN-imp
Cluster 1 19–2 12–0 75–0 0.1–0 0.01–0 
Cluster 2 10–6 19–0 64–0 0.06–0 0.01–0 
Cluster 3 6–4 10.42–1.35 68–3 0.07–0.03 0.01–0 
Cluster 4 17–4 14.7–6.5 59–3 0.11–0.05 0.01–0.005 
Cluster 5 28–5 6.1–0.9 57–0.5 0.13–0.06 0.02–0.01 
Figure 7

Similar sub-catchments in the Gorganrood catchment obtained by the proposed automatic clustering algorithm.

Figure 7

Similar sub-catchments in the Gorganrood catchment obtained by the proposed automatic clustering algorithm.

Close modal

As presented in Table 5, the range of changes in each variable is limited. For example, the range of the CN in adjacent clusters 3 and 4 is 67–88 and 55–56, respectively. As another example, the slope of clusters 2 and 3 is in the range of 18–21 and 1–18 degrees, respectively. The closeness of the CN values of the sub-basins located in each cluster shows the physical similarity of the sub-basins located in each cluster. Also, according to Table 6, the standard deviation values of physical and geological characteristics in obtained clusters are low in comparison to the mean that indicates the relative similarity of the sub-catchments located in obtained clusters.

Also, to check the credibility of the proposed clustering method, clustering was also performed using the well-known k-means clustering algorithm with five clusters (Wilkin & Huang 2007), and the result is shown in Figure 8. Graphically, the two methods provide partially similar results. Although the clusters obtained from the k-means clustering have somewhat spatial coherency, the value of the silhouette measure for this method is 0.35, which is 40% less than that of the ACDE method. As a result, the proposed method can be considered superior in clustering.
Figure 8

Similar sub-catchments in the Gorganrood catchment obtained by k-means (k = 5) clustering algorithm.

Figure 8

Similar sub-catchments in the Gorganrood catchment obtained by k-means (k = 5) clustering algorithm.

Close modal

The aim of this article is the calibration of the SWMM model in ungauged sub-catchments in a flood-prone catchment, in Iran. A sensitivity analysis showed that impervious percentage, roughness coefficient of impervious surfaces, CN, and roughness coefficient of pervious surfaces are the most effective parameters affecting total runoff and peak discharge. A regionalization approach based on clustering provided a promising tool for the calibration of ungauged sub-catchments. The clustering approach provided parameters transferring from gauged to similar ungauged sub-catchments. In contrast to most of the existing clustering techniques, the optimal number of clusters was determined using an automatic clustering optimization technique that has not been seen in previous works. ACDE method determined both the optimal number of clusters and their members. The correctness of ACDE clustering was evaluated in comparison with the well-known k-means clustering algorithm, and the global validity index proved the superiority of ACDE in clustering and parameter estimation for hydrological model calibration. The proposed calibration method is a useful approach for the parameter setting of a short-term flood forecasting model in basins with low data availability. In this study, clustering has been done by the optimization method, but the application of experimental clustering methods based on the researcher's knowledge and their comparison can be considered for future studies. Furthermore, a combination of various clustering techniques and developing a hybrid clustering approach might give better results than the other algorithms. This approach can also be followed in future research lines. In this research, due to the lack of meteorological information, the meteorological properties of the sub-catchment were not used as the selected features of clustering. It is suggested that this weakness be resolved in future studies by applying the meteorological properties of the basin like rainfall and temperature or humidity in clustering for hydrological modeling.

Also, for various physical properties and geomorphological attributes of the sub-catchments, similar weights were considered. However, depending on the study area, available data, and expert knowledge, these features might be of varying importance. Therefore, another suggestion for future research is to involve different weighting factors in the proposed automatic clustering approach to improve the effectiveness of the approach compared to the other methods. Extending the precipitation monitoring network and using adjacent basin observations, and considering other characteristics such as the river network degree, which indicates the hydrological behavior of sub-catchments, are recommended to address in future studies to eliminate data deficiency and uncertainties.

All relevant data are included in the paper or its Supplementary Information.

The authors declare there is no conflict.

Ahani
A.
,
Mousavi Nadoushani
S. S.
&
Moridi
A.
2020
Simultaneous regionalization of gauged and ungauged watersheds using a missing data clustering method
.
Journal of Hydrologic Engineering
25
(
5
),
04020015
.
Alizadeh
Z.
,
Yazdi
J.
&
Moridi
A.
2018
Development of an entropy method for groundwater quality monitoring network design
.
Environmental Processes
5
,
769
788
.
Arsenault
R.
&
Brissette
F.
2016
Analysis of continuous streamflow regionalization methods within a virtual setting
.
Hydrological Sciences Journal
61
(
15
),
2680
2693
.
Bandyopadhyay
S.
&
Maulik
U.
2002
An evolutionary technique based on K-means algorithm for optimal clustering in RN
.
Information Sciences
146
(
1–4
),
221
237
.
Bardossy
A.
2007
Calibration of hydrological model parameters for ungauged catchments
.
Hydrology and Earth System Sciences
11
,
703
710
.
Bemmoussat
A.
,
Korichi
K.
,
Baahmed
D.
,
Maref
N.
,
Djoukbala
O.
,
Kalantari
Z.
&
Bateni
S. M.
2021
Contribution of satellite-based precipitation in hydrological rainfall–runoff modeling: Case study of the Hammam Boughrara Region in Algeria
.
Earth Systems and Environment
5
,
873
881
.
Bezdek
J. C.
,
Boggavarapu
S.
,
Hall
L. O.
&
Bensaid
A.
1994
Genetic algorithm guided clustering
. In:
Proceedings of the First IEEE Conference on Evolutionary Computation. IEEE World Congress on Computational Intelligence
.
IEEE
,
Piscataway, NJ, USA
, pp.
34
39
.
Bhattacharya
M.
&
Guojun
L.
2003
DAFHEA: A dynamic approximate fitness-based hybrid EA for optimisation problems
. In
Paper Presented at the 2003 Congress on Evolutionary Computation, 2003
.
CEC ‘03
.
https://doi.org/10.1109/CEC.2003.1299903
.
Bormann
H.
,
Diekkrüger
B.
&
Renschler
C.
1999
Regionalization concept for hydrological modelling on different scales using a physically based model: Results and evaluation
.
Physics and Chemistry of the Earth B
24
(
7
),
799
804
.
Burn
D. H.
&
Boorman
D. B.
1993
Estimation of hydrological parameters at ungauged catchments
.
Journal of Hydrology
143
(
3–4
),
429
454
.
Chou
C. H.
,
Su
M. C.
&
Lai
E.
2004
A new cluster validity measure and its application to image compression
.
Pattern Analysis and Applications
7
(
2
),
205
220
.
Chung
I. M.
,
Kim
N. W.
,
Na
H.
,
Lee
J.
,
Yoo
S.
,
Kim
J.
&
Yang
S.
2011
Technical note: Integrated surface-groundwater analysis for the Pyoseon Region, Jeju Island in Korea
.
Applied Engineering in Agriculture
27
(
6
),
875
886
.
Das
S.
,
Abraham
A.
&
Konar
A.
2008
Automatic clustering using an improved differential evolution algorithm
.
IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics Part A
38
(
1
),
218
236
.
Das
S.
,
Abraham
A.
&
Konar
A.
2009
Metaheuristic Clustering
, Vol.
178
.
Springer
,
Berlin, Heidelberg
.
Davies
D. L.
&
Bouldin
D. W.
1979
A cluster separation measure
.
IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence
PAMI-1
(
2
),
224
227
.
Dirks
K. N.
,
Hay
J. E.
,
Stow
C. D.
&
Harris
D.
1998
High-resolution studies of rainfall on Norfolk Island: Part II: Interpolation of rainfall data
.
Journal of Hydrology
208
(
3–4
),
187
193
.
Fränti
P.
,
Kivijärvi
J.
,
Kaukoranta
T.
&
Nevalainen
O.
1997
Genetic algorithms for large-scale clustering problems
.
The Computer Journal
40
(
9
),
547
554
.
Ghumman
A. R.
,
Ahmad
M. M.
,
Hashmi
H. N.
&
Kamal
M. A.
2011
Regionalization of hydrologic parameters of Nash mode
.
Water Resources Management
38
(
6
),
735
744
.
Gupta
H. V.
,
Sorooshian
S.
&
Yapo
P. O.
1999
Status of automatic calibration for hydrologic models: Comparison with multilevel expert calibration
.
ASCE Journal of Hydrologic Engineering
4
(
2
),
135
143
.
Halkidi
M.
,
Batistakis
Y.
&
Vazirgiannis
M.
2001
On clustering validation techniques
.
Journal of Intelligent Information Systems
17
(
2
),
107
145
.
Hancer
E.
,
Xue
B.
&
Zhang
M.
2020
A survey on feature selection approaches for clustering
.
Artificial Intelligence Review
53
(
6
),
4519
4545
.
Hegerty
B.
,
Hung
C. C.
&
Kasprak
K.
2009
A comparative study on differential evolution and genetic algorithms for some combinatorial problems
. In:
Proceedings of 8th Mexican International Conference on Artificial Intelligence
. Vol.
9
, p.
13
.
Hruschka
E. R.
&
Ebecken
N. F.
2003
A genetic algorithm for cluster analysis
.
Intelligent Data Analysis
7
(
1
),
15
25
.
Hruschka
E. R.
,
Campello
R. J.
&
De Castro
L. N.
2006
Evolving clusters in gene-expression data
.
Information Sciences
176
(
13
),
1898
1927
.
Hruschka
E. R.
,
Campello
R. J. G. B.
,
Freitas
A. A.
&
de Carvalho
A. C. P. L. F.
2009
A survey of evolutionary algorithms for clustering
.
IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part C
39
(
2
),
133
155
.
Hu
W.
,
Saleh
K. H.
&
Azarm
S.
2012
Approximation assisted multiobjective optimization with combined global and local metamodeling
. In:
International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference
,
Vol. 45028
.
American Society of Mechanical Engineers
,
New York, USA
, pp.
753
764
.
Huber
W. C.
,
Dickinson
R. E.
,
Barnwell
T. O.
Jr.
&
Branch
A.
1988
Storm Water Management Model; Version 4
.
Environmental Protection Agency
,
United States
.
Jang
S.
,
Cho
M.
,
Yoon
J.
,
Yoon
Y.
,
Kim
S.
,
Kim
G.
,
Kim
L.
&
Aksoy
H.
2007
Using SWMM as a tool for hydrologic impact assessment
.
Desalination
212
(
1
),
344
356
.
Jeffrey
S. J.
,
Carter
J. O.
,
Moodie
K. B.
&
Beswick
A. R.
2001
Using spatial interpolation to construct a comprehensive archive of Australian climate data
.
Environmental Modelling & Software
16
(
4
),
309
330
.
Jun
S.
,
Park
J. H.
,
Lee
W.
,
Park
C.
,
Lee
S.
,
Lee
K. S.
&
Jeong
G. C.
2010
The changes in potential usable water resources by increasing the amount of groundwater use: The case of Gapcheon watershed in Korea
.
Geosciences Journal
14
(
1
),
33
39
.
Kahya
E.
&
Demirel
M. C.
2007
A comparison of low-flow clustering methods: Streamflow grouping
.
Journal of Engineering and Applied Science
2
(
3
),
524
530
.
Kim
H.
,
Jung
M.
,
Mallari
K. J. B.
,
Pak
G.
,
Kim
S.
,
Kim
S.
,
Kim
L.
&
Yoon
J.
2015
Assessment of porous pavement effectiveness on runoff reduction under climate change scenarios
.
Desalination and Water Treatment
53
(
11
),
3142
3147
.
Lam
N. S. N.
1983
Spatial interpolation methods: A review
.
The American Cartographer
10
(
2
),
129
150
.
Lensen
A.
,
Xue
B.
&
Zhang
M.
2017
Using particle swarm optimisation and the silhouette metric to estimate the number of clusters, select features, and perform clustering
. In:
Applications of Evolutionary Computation: 20th European Conference, EvoApplications 2017, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, Proceedings, Part I 20
.
Springer
,
International Publishing, Cham
, pp.
538
554
.
Liu
Y.
,
Chen
K.
,
Liao
X.
&
Zhang
W.
2004
A genetic clustering method for intrusion detection
.
Pattern Recognition
37
(
5
),
927
942
.
Lu
Y.
,
Lu
S.
,
Fotouhi
F.
,
Deng
Y.
&
Brown
S. J.
2004
FGKA: A fast genetic k-means clustering algorithm
. In:
Proceedings of the 2004 ACM Symposium on Applied Computing
. pp.
622
623
.
Ma
P. C.
,
Chan
K. C.
,
Yao
X.
&
Chiu
D. K.
2006
An evolutionary clustering algorithm for gene expression microarray data analysis
.
IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation
10
(
3
),
296
314
.
MacQueen
J.
1967
Classification
and analysis of multivariate observations
. In:
Fifth Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability
,
University of California
,
Los Angeles, LA
, pp.
281
297
.
Maier
H. R.
,
Razavi
S.
,
Kapelan
Z.
,
Matott
L. S.
,
Kasprzyk
J.
&
Tolson
B. A.
2019
Introductory overview: Optimization using evolutionary algorithms and other metaheuristics
.
Environmental Modelling & Software
114
,
195
213
.
Maulik
U.
&
Bandyopadhyay
S.
2000
Genetic algorithm-based clustering technique
.
Pattern Recognition
33
(
9
),
1455
1465
.
Merz
R.
&
Blöschl
G.
2004
Regionalisation of catchment model parameters
.
Journal of Hydrology
287
(
1
),
95
123
.
Moliere
D. R.
,
Lowry
J. B. C.
&
Humphrey
C. L.
2009
Classifying the flow regime of data limited streams in the wet–dry tropical region of Australia
.
Journal of Hydrology
367
(
1–2
),
1
13
.
Mosavi
A.
,
Golshan
M.
,
Choubin
B.
,
Ziegler
A. D.
,
Sigaroodi
S. K.
,
Zhang
F.
&
Dineva
A. A.
2021
Fuzzy clustering and distributed model for streamflow estimation in ungauged watersheds
.
Scientific Reports
11
(
1
),
1
14
.
Mosley
M. P.
1983
Response of braided rivers to changing discharge
.
Journal of Hydrology (New Zealand)
22
,
18
67
.
Nayak
J.
,
Kanungo
D. P.
,
Naik
B.
&
Behera
H. S.
2016
Evolutionary improved swarm-based hybrid K-means algorithm for cluster analysis
. In:
Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Computer and Communication Technologies: IC3T 2015, Volume 1
.
Springer
,
India
, pp.
343
352
.
Oudin
L.
,
Kay
A.
,
Andréassian
V.
&
Perrin
C.
2010
Are seemingly physically similar catchments truly hydrologically similar?
Water Resources Research
46
(
11
),
W11558
.
Pagliero
L.
,
Bouraoui
F.
,
Diels
J.
,
Willems
P.
&
McIntyre
N.
2019
Investigating regionalization techniques for large-scale hydrological modelling
.
Journal of Hydrology
570
,
220
235
.
Pratima
D.
&
Nimmakanti
N.
2012
Pattern recognition algorithms for cluster identification problem
.
International Journal of Computer Science and Information
1
,
2231
5292
.
Rahmati
O.
,
Haghizadeh
A.
&
Stefanidis
S.
2016
Assessing the accuracy of GIS-based analytical hierarchy process for watershed prioritization; Gorganrood River Basin, Iran
.
Water Resources Management
30
(
3
),
1131
1150
.
doi:10.1007/s11269-015-1215-4
.
Rai
P. K.
,
Chahar
B. R.
&
Dhanya
C. T.
2017
GIS-based SWMM model for simulating the catchment response to flood events
.
Hydrology Research
48
(
2
),
384
394
.
Ramachandra Rao
A.
&
Srinivas
V. V.
2006
Regionalization of watersheds by hybrid cluster analysis
.
Journal of Hydrology
318
,
37
56
.
Reddy
C. K.
&
Vinzamuri
B.
2018
A survey of partitional and hierarchical clustering algorithms
. In:
Aggarwal, C. C. & Reddy, C. K. (eds).
Data Clustering
.
Chapman and Hall/CRC
,
Boca Raton, FL, USA
, pp.
87
110
.
Rendón
E.
,
Abundez
I. M.
, ,
Gutierrez
C.
,
Zagal
S. D.
,
Arizmendi
A.
,
Quiroz
E. M.
&
Arzate
H. E.
2011
A comparison of internal and external cluster validation indexes
. In:
Proceedings of the American Conference
, Vol.
29
.
San Francisco, CA
,
USA
, pp.
1
10
.
Robinson
T. P.
&
Metternicht
G.
2006
Testing the performance of spatial interpolation techniques for mapping soil properties
.
Computers and Electronics in Agriculture
50
(
2
),
97
108
.
Rossman
L. A.
2010
Storm Water Management Model: User's Manual Version 5.0
.
US EPA, National Risk Management Research Laboratory
,
Cincinnati, OH
,
USA
.
Rousseeuw
P. J.
1987
Silhouettes: A graphical aid to the interpretation and validation of cluster analysis
.
Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics
20
,
53
65
.
Salvador
S.
&
Chan
P.
2004
Determining the number of clusters/segments in hierarchical clustering/segmentation algorithms
. In:
16th IEEE International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence, 2004.
IEEE
, pp.
576
584
.
Samaniego
L.
,
Bárdossy
A.
&
Kumar
R.
2010
Streamflow prediction in ungauged catchments using copula-based dissimilarity measures
.
Water Resources Research
46
(
2
),
W02506
.
Samuel
J.
,
Coulibaly
P.
&
Metcalfe
R. A.
2011
Estimation of continuous streamflow in Ontario ungauged basins: Comparison of regionalization methods
.
Journal of Hydrologic Engineering
16
(
5
),
447
459
.
Sengupta
A.
,
Adams
S. K.
,
Bledsoe
B. P.
,
Stein
E. D.
,
McCune
K. S.
&
Mazor
R. D.
2018
Tools for managing hydrologic alteration on a regional scale: estimating changes in flow characteristics at ungauged sites
.
Freshwater Biology
63
(
8
),
769
785
.
Sheng
W.
&
Liu
X.
2004
A hybrid algorithm for k-medoid clustering of large data sets
. In:
Proceedings of the 2004 Congress on Evolutionary Computation (IEEE Cat. No. 04TH8753)
, Vol.
1
.
IEEE
, pp.
77
82
.
Singh
S. K.
,
McMillan
H.
,
Bárdossy
A.
&
Fateh
C.
2016
Nonparametric catchment clustering using the data depth function
.
Hydrological Sciences Journal
61
(
15
),
2649
2667
.
Storn
R.
&
Price
K. V.
1995
Differential Evolution – A Simple and Efficient Adaptive Scheme for Global Optimization Over Continuous Spaces
.
Technical Report TR-95–012, ICSI
,
International Computer Science, Berkeley, CA, USA
.
Vandewiele
G. L.
&
Elias
A.
1995
Monthly water balance of ungauged catchments obtained by geographical regionalization
.
Journal of Hydrology
170
(
1–4
),
277
291
.
Wagener
T.
,
Sivapalan
M.
,
Troch
P.
&
Woods
R.
2007
Catchment classification and hydrologic similarity
.
Geography Compass
1
(
4
),
901
931
.
Wang
K. H.
&
Altunkaynak
A.
2012
Comparative case study of rainfall-runoff modeling between SWMM and fuzzy logic approach
.
Journal of Hydrologic Engineering
17
(
2
),
283
291
.
Water Research Institute
(WRI)
2011
Development of Golestan Dam Flood Warning System Model (Gorganrood River): Hydraulic Model Report
.
Water Research Institute
,
Tehran, Iran
.
(In Persian)
.
Wilkin
G. A.
&
Huang
X.
2007
K-means clustering algorithms: Implementation and comparison
. In:
Second International Multi-Symposiums on Computer and Computational Sciences
.
IEEE
,
Piscataway, NJ, USA
, pp.
133
136
.
Yakowitz
S.
&
Karlsson
M.
1987
Nearest neighbor methods for time series, with application to rainfall/runoff prediction
.
Advances in the Statistical Sciences: Stochastic Hydrology
.
Springer
,
New York, USA
,
149
160
.
Yeh
H. C.
,
Chen
Y. C.
,
Wei
C.
&
Chen
R. H.
2011
Entropy and kriging approach to rainfall network design
.
Paddy and Water Environment
9
(
3
),
343
355
.
Zaghloul
N. A.
1983
Sensitivity analysis of the SWMM runoff-transport parameters and the effects of catchment discretisation
.
Advances in Water Resources
6
(
4
),
214
223
.
doi:10.1016/0309-1708(83)90059-3
.
Zhang
Y.
,
Mańdziuk
J.
,
Quek
C. H.
&
Goh
B. W.
2017
Curvature-based method for determining the number of clusters
.
Information Sciences
415
,
414
428
.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), which permits copying and redistribution for non-commercial purposes with no derivatives, provided the original work is properly cited (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).