2022 8th International Conference on Advanced Computing and Communication Systems (ICACCS)
Performance evaluation of hybrid ANFIS-HHO
for Flood prediction
Dillip Kumar Ghose
Department of Civil Engineering
NIT Silchar
Assam, India
dillipghose_2002@yahoo.co.in
Abinash Sahoo
Department of Civil Engineering
NIT Silchar
Assam, India
bablusahoo1992@gmail.com
Abstract—Because of the catastrophic socio-economic effects
of flood and the increase in its anticipated occurrence shortly,
flood prediction has gained importance worldwide. Hence, a
more consistent hydrologic prediction model is vital to plan,
design, and manage water resources activities. This research
introduces a hybrid model integrating an adaptive neuro-fuzzy
inference system with harris hawks optimisation (ANFIS-HHO)
for forecasting river flood events in Barak river basin, India. The
robust model's performance is compared with simple ANFIS
based on Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE), and root mean square
error (RMSE). Results obtained indicate that the hybrid ANFIS-
HHO model gave best performance with NSE of 0.9885, and
RMSE of 61.87, implying its potential in flood forecasting. Also,
the HHO algorithm can improve reliability of the standalone
ANFIS model in flood forecasting and can solve problems of
overfitting and underfitting during training of ANFIS model.
Keywords— Flood; ANFIS; ANFIS-HHO; Barak River
I. INTRODUCTION
Floods are the most common hydrologic extremes
frequently experienced in river basins and occur anywhere
after heavy rainfall. In a country with low structural
affordability because of financial restrictions, severity of flood
events is evident. Currently, flood is a global concern
producing severe threats to inhabitants living in riverside. The
geographical conditions, river bank overflowing, heavy rain,
abrupt destruction of a riverbank, insufficient urban drainage
system are some factors causing floods. Information on
rainfall is the primary requirement of all flood forecasting
models. The practical application of flood forecasting and
monitoring systems is non-trivial as it needs reliability
combined with accessibility of associated information.
Flooding over the years has been examined under different
considerations and methods like internet-based real-time data
acquisition, wireless sensors networks, and the development of
flood models and forecasting systems utilizing artificial neural
networks (ANNs). Over the last few decades, Artificial
Kshirabdhi Tanaya
Department of Civil Engineering
NIT Silchar
Assam, India
kshirabdhitanaya195@gmail.com
Upendra Kumar
Department of Civil Engineering
NIT Silchar
Assam, India
upendra4nits@gmail.com
intelligence (AI) models have significantly contributed by
providing enhanced accurateness and economical solutions for
simulating physical flood practices (Sahoo et al. 2020;
Samantaray and Sahoo 2020; Sahoo et al. 2021a, b). They also
have contributed significantly in prediction and forecasting of
other hydrological variables of a watershed like water table
depth (Sridharam et al. 2021; Samantaray and Sahoo 2021a),
runoff (Samantaray et al. 2021; Jimmy et al. 2021; Samantaray
and Sahoo 2020), sediment (Samantaray and Sahoo 2021b;
Mohanta et al. 2021; Sahoo et al. 2021), streamflow
(Samantaray and Sahoo 2021; Sahoo et al. 2019), etc.
Nguyen and Chua (2011) adopted ANFIS model for
forecasting water level of River Lower Mekong at Pakse daily,
located in Lao People's Democratic Republic. Kant et al.
(2013) proposed a multi-objective evolutionary NN model to
accurately and reliably forecast hourly water levels at Naraj
gauge station in Mahanadi river basin, India, and compared
performance of proposed model with bootstrap-based NN and
ANFIS models. Nguyen et al. (2014) investigated the
relationship amid flow characteristics of River Lower Mekong
and model performance of ANFIS. They concluded that
adding rainfall as input provided significant developments to
long-term estimates. Rezaeianzadeh et al. (2014) did a
comparative analysis of models using ANN and ANFIS in
flood forecasting. They found that input to ANFIS leads to
more accurate predictions than the simple ANN model. In his
research, Awan and Bae (2014) represent that an ANFIS based
model gives more accurate results in dam inflow prediction in
Guesan dam of South Korea. However, the above-stated
models are incapable while dealing with nonstationary or
transitory data. Therefore, hybrid modeling methodologies,
which comprise different integrated techniques and data-
preprocessing, have been found to enhance forecasting models
performance (Okkan, 2012).
Applicability of wavelet-based ANFIS model was
investigated in forecasting flood events at different watersheds
 2022 8th International Conference on Advanced Computing and Communication Systems (ICACCS)
(Sehgal et al. 2014; Seo et al. 2015). Tein Bui et al. (2018) III. METHODOLOGY
introduced ANFIS-CA (cultural), ANFIS-BA (Bees), and
ANFIS-IWO (invasive weed optimisation) algorithms for A. ANFIS
mapping flood vulnerability regions in Haraz catchment, Iran. Define ANFIS is a FIS developed in the early 1990s executed
Their outcomes revealed that ANFIS-IWO gives superior within adaptive networks. The ANFIS network based on
performance with lower RMSE. Kim et al. (2019) studied specified input-output data sets and human knowledge utilises
ANFIS hydrodynamic models for improving hydrologic
a hybrid learning process for constructing an input-output
models to predict floods in small tributaries of South Korea.
mapping (Fig. 2). During simulation, ANFIS is used for
Zhou et al. (2019) projected a recurrent ANFIS combined with
Least Square Estimator and Genetic Algorithm that optimise modeling nonlinear constituents in a control system online and
model parameters for making multi-step onward flood estimate frenzied time series, yielding impressive outcomes.
forecasting. Samantaray et al. (2021) used hybrid ANFIS- ANFIS can capture benefits of both ANN and fuzzy logic in a
GWO (Grey Wolves Optimizer) and ANFIS-GOA single framework; hence it performs better than simple neural
(Grasshopper Optimization Algorithm) models for predicting network models. In ANFIS, by making nonlinear input/output
flood in Mahanadi river basin. They found that GOA mapping utilising fuzzy IF-THEN rules, Takagi-Sugeno
improved performance and generalization capability of ANFIS inference technique is employed.
than GWO and provided more accurate and reliable results for
all input scenarios. Tabbussum and Dar (2021) used ANN, IF (x is A1) and (y is B2), THEN  f1  p1 x  q1 x  r1  (1)
fuzzy logic, and ANFIS algorithms for developing nine
different flood predictive models that used every accessible
training algorithm. Results showed that developed ANFIS IF (x is A2) and (y is B2), THEN  f2  p 2 x  q 2 x  r2  (2)
model with hybrid training algorithm provided the best
predictions. The applicability of hybrid ANFIS-HHO model , , , - corresponding fuzzy sets; , , and , ,
is investigated in this study for flood forecasting considering - constraints of output function. However, ANFIS suffers
past flood discharge data of Patharkandi gauging station of from shortcomings like being trapped in local optima and slow
Barak river basin, India. rate of convergence, specifically for larger search space and
calculations. Hence it is necessary to apply hybrid
II. STUDY AREA methodologies combined with ANFIS for overcoming such
drawbacks.
Barak river catchment lies in northeast region of India having
drainage area of around 41,723 km2. The basin is situated
between 90° 15ʹ to 94° 0ʹ E longitude and 23° 0ʹ to 25°58ʹ
N latitude. It is the second major stream in North-Eastern
India after Brahmaputra River. Red, yellow, and laterite
soils are the major soil types found in sub-basin. Monsoon
in this basin starts from June and lasts until August and at
this time maximum rainfall occurs in the basin.

Fig. 2. General structure of ANFIS network

B. HHO (Harris hawks optimization)

Heidari et al. (2019) developed HHO as a swarm-based
optimization algorithm. HHO has received extensive
consideration among researchers while dealing with different
applications in real-world problems regarding their
performance, quality of outcomes, and its suitable
convergence. In HHO, search agents are represented by
chasing actions of hawks, whereas prey signifies the best
location. HHO can play a significant part to solve several real-
world optimisation problems. In this study, HHO searches for
optimum values of ANFIS parameters and determines best
operating conditions for flood predictions.

Fig. 1. Location of study area

The HHO uses the rabbit's escape energy ( ) specified in Eq.
(1) to replicate the transition from exploration to exploitation.
 2022 8th International Conference on Advanced Computing and Communication Systems (ICACCS)

 t
E  2 E 0 1   (3)
 T Table 1: Model input arrangements

where ] representing primary value, this value Description of model Output Input combinations
is utilised for indicating either physical strengthening of rabbit ANFIS ANFIS-HHO variable
or its flagging. This technique is utilized when and ANFIS1 ANFIS-HHO-1 Ft D(t)
(where reflects prey's capacity to flee). Because the ANFIS2 ANFIS-HHO-2 Ft D(t), D(t-1)
ANFIS3 ANFIS-HHO-3 Ft D(t), D(t-1), D(t-2)
rabbit still has adequate energy to flee, the hawks choose the ANFIS4 ANFIS-HHO-4 Ft D(t), D(t-1), D(t-2), D(t-3)
preeminent option from population to update solution in
present iteration . This may be expressed as follows: IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

X t  1  X t   E J * X b t   X t  , X t 
In present study ANFIS and hybrid ANFIS-HHO models are
(4) applied for flood forecasting considering historical data from
Patharkandi gauging station. Table 2 shows the NSE, and RMSE
ANFIS-HHO reduces prediction errors and provides more
values depicting performance of the applied models. Fig. 3 gives
genuine and comprehensive results. Hence, the HHO
algorithm is used for ANFIS training to improve the prediction R2 value that specifies the relation amid observed and predicted
results (Fig. 3). values. Generally, the NSE values between 0.60–0.80 are
considered as moderate to good and values more than 0.80 as
better (Lipiwattanakarn and Saengsawang 2005). For ANFIS-
HHO, The NSE values for ANFIS and ANFIS-HHO were found
to be 0.9885 and 0.9534 respectively. Based on these values,
performance of both models could be judged better. However,
with slightly more NSE value, the hybrid model is considered
best for flood forecasting in current study. RMSE values lie
between 61.87m3/s to 103.23m3/s in training phase and between
82.86m3/s to 117.09m3/s in testing phase. The plot showing
ANFIS-HHO model generated a R2 value of 0.97673, signifying
a very good correlation amid actual and predicted values at
Patharkandi. It gives information about performance indicators in
a graphical form when data sets are closer to 45o line. Prediction
values nearest to 45o line represents superior prediction
instances. Similarly, conventional ANFIS provided R2 value of
0.92953 signifying the predicted values more scattered from the
Fig. 3. Flowchart of ANFIS-HHO model
45o line.
C. Evaluating Constraint
Discharge data (Dt) (1985-2020) are collected from CWC, Table 2 Performance of flood simulation models
Guwahati. 75% of data are utilised for training and 25% are
utilised for testing the models. Two statistical measures Station Name Model Name RMSE NSE RMSE NSE
Training Testing
namely NSE and RMSE are used to evaluate model
performance. Patharkandi ANFIS-1 102.41 0.9465 112.09 0.9246
ANFIS-2 89.65 0.9489 108.65 0.927
RMSE = (5) ANFIS-3 87.53 0.9503 103.82 0.9314
ANFIS-4 85.99 0.9534 99.03 0.9331
ANFIS-HHO-1 65.23 0.9817 88.31 0.9492
NSE = (6) ANFIS-HHO-2 64.34 0.9836 86.71 0.9587
ANFIS-HHO-3 62.86 0.9858 84.08 0.9651
ANFIS-HHO-4 61.87 0.9885 82.86 0.9683

Table 1 shows the different modelling inputs considered for

flood prediction at Patharkandi gauging station. Here Ft
signifies the output variable i.e., flood and D(t), D(t-1), D(t-2),
D(t-3) represents discharge value at the current month, one-
month lag, two-month lag, and three-month lag respectively.
Effect of the input variables on flood prediction by two
applied models are discussed below.
 2022 8th International Conference on Advanced Computing and Communication Systems (ICACCS)
Fig. 4. Scatter plot between actual vs. predicted flood
Fig. 5 demonstrates flood prediction values by ANFIS
(3984.906m3/sec) and ANFIS-HHO (4191.638m3/sec) models
against actual value of 4260.542m3/sec for the entire time scale.
The zoomed plot shows the testing phase which becomes more
significant for evaluating the model performances. It can be
observed that predicted values by ANFIS-HHO model are much
closer to the observed values for the best scenario i.e., ANFIS-
HHO-4. There is basically less substantial difference between
predicted values by hybrid ANFIS-HHO model and the observed
ones. However, a significant difference is observed in observed
and predicted values by standalone ANFIS model. This again
proves the superiority of the hybrid model compared to the
conventional model.
Fig. 5. Predicted v/s actual monthly flood discharge of ANFIS and ANFIS-HHO
models
The overall performance of observed and predictive models is
again assessed using box plots as shown in fig. 6. It shows the
distribution of predicted flood values with respect to the
observed ones. In all cases, applied ANFIS-HHO model
outperformed conventional ANFIS model.
Fig. 6. Boxplots of actual and predicted flood values by selected models
With the present statistical outcomes and the graphical
representations, we can conclude that accuracy of ANFIS-HHO
model is superior to ANFIS on all lead times. Obtained results
confirmed the outcomes of Padmawar 2019; Wan et al. 2019;
Dtissibe et al. 2020; Ding et al. 2020, who indicated that
accurateness of flood forecasting and identification has improved
even due to presence of highly non-linear data and with larger
datasets. It was also observed that combination of all input
variables considering different lag times provided the best
prediction model. To forecast flood events, it is very essential to
have information regarding performances of various ANN
models for high water level predictions since this knowledge
about prediction accuracy is of greatest significance compared to
medium or low water level profiles.
V. CONCLUSION AND FUTURE WORK
Present works studies the applicability of hybrid ANFIS-HHO
and conventional ANFIS models for flood forecasting and
evaluate their performance for different lead times at
Patharkandi gauge station in Barak river basin, India. The
forecasting accurateness of projected models is evaluated
utilising RMSE and NSE. The hybrid ANFIS model
forecasted flood discharge with NSE of 0.9885, and RMSE of
61.87. A fair agreement was achieved between observed and
predicted values for simulated flood events using ANFIS-
HHO. Results show that the combination of HHO and ANFIS
model can increase the efficacy of standalone ANFIS model.
For further studies, ANFIS-HHO model can forecast other
hydrological parameters of a watershed under different
hydrological, geographical, and climatic conditions.
References
 2022 8th International Conference on Advanced Computing and Communication Systems (ICACCS)
[1] J.A. Awan, and D.H. Bae, “Improving ANFIS based model for long-
term dam inflow prediction by incorporating monthly rainfall forecasts,”
Water resources management, vol. 28(5), pp.1185-1199, 2014.
[2] Kant, A., Suman, P.K., Giri, B.K., Tiwari, M.K., Chatterjee, C., Nayak,
P.C. and Kumar, S., 2013. Comparison of multi-objective evolutionary
neural network, adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system and bootstrap-
based neural network for flood forecasting. Neural Computing and
Applications, 23(1), pp.231-246.
[3] Khac‐Tien Nguyen, P. and Hock‐Chye Chua, L., 2012. The data‐driven
approach as an operational real‐time flood forecasting model.
Hydrological Processes, 26(19), pp.2878-2893.
[4] Kim, B., Choi, S.Y. and Han, K.Y., 2019. Integrated real-time flood
forecasting and inundation analysis in small–medium streams. Water,
11(5), p.919.
[5] Jimmy, S.R., Sahoo, A., Samantaray, S. and Ghose, D.K., 2021.
Prophecy of Runoff in a River Basin Using Various Neural Networks. In
Communication Software and Networks (pp. 709-718). Springer,
Singapore.
[6] Mohanta, N.R., Biswal, P., Kumari, S.S., Samantaray, S. and Sahoo, A.,
2021. Estimation of Sediment Load Using Adaptive Neuro-Fuzzy
Inference System at Indus River Basin, India. In Intelligent Data
Engineering and Analytics (pp. 427-434). Springer, Singapore.
[7] Nguyen, P.K.T., Chua, L.H.C. and Son, L.H., 2014. Flood forecasting in
large rivers with data-driven models. Natural hazards, 71(1), pp.767-
784.
[8] Rezaeianzadeh, M., Tabari, H., Yazdi, A.A., Isik, S. and Kalin, L., 2014.
Flood flow forecasting using ANN, ANFIS and regression models.
Neural Computing and Applications, 25(1), pp.25-37.
[9] Sahoo, A., Barik, A., Samantaray, S. and Ghose, D.K., 2021. Prediction
of Sedimentation in a Watershed Using RNN and SVM. In
Communication Software and Networks (pp. 701-708). Springer,
Singapore.
[10] Sahoo, A., Samantaray, S. and Ghose, D.K., 2019. Stream flow
forecasting in Mahanadi River Basin using artificial neural networks.
Procedia Computer Science, 157, pp.168-174.
[11] Samantaray, S. and Sahoo, A., 2020. Prediction of runoff using BPNN,
FFBPNN, CFBPNN algorithm in arid watershed: A case study.
International Journal of Knowledge-based and Intelligent Engineering
Systems, 24(3), pp.243-251.
[12] Samantaray, S., Sahoo, A., Mohanta, N.R., Biswal, P. and Das, U.K.,
2021. Runoff Prediction Using Hybrid Neural Networks in Semi-Arid
Watershed, India: A Case Study. In Communication Software and
Networks (pp. 729-736). Springer, Singapore.
[13] Samantaray, S. and Sahoo, A., 2021. Prediction of suspended sediment
concentration using hybrid SVM-WOA approaches. Geocarto
International, pp.1-27.
[14] Samanataray, S. and Sahoo, A., 2021. A Comparative Study on
Prediction of Monthly Streamflow Using Hybrid ANFIS-PSO
Approaches. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, 25(10), pp.4032-4043.
[15] Samantaray, S. and Sahoo, A., 2021. Modelling response of infiltration
loss toward water table depth using RBFN, RNN, ANFIS techniques.
International Journal of Knowledge-based and Intelligent Engineering
Systems, 25(2), pp.227-234.
[16] Sehgal, V., Sahay, R.R. and Chatterjee, C., 2014. Effect of utilization of
discrete wavelet components on flood forecasting performance of
wavelet based ANFIS models. Water resources management, 28(6),
pp.1733-1749.
[17] Seo, Y., Kim, S. and Singh, V.P., 2015. Multistep-ahead flood
forecasting using wavelet and data-driven methods. KSCE Journal of
Civil Engineering, 19(2), pp.401-417.
[18] Sridharam, S., Sahoo, A., Samantaray, S. and Ghose, D.K., 2021.
Estimation of Water Table Depth Using Wavelet-ANFIS: A Case Study.
In Communication Software and Networks (pp. 747-754). Springer,
Singapore.
[19] Tabbussum, R. and Dar, A.Q., 2021. Performance evaluation of artificial
intelligence paradigms—artificial neural networks, fuzzy logic, and
adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system for flood prediction.
Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28(20), pp.25265-
25282.
[20] Tien Bui, D., Khosravi, K., Li, S., Shahabi, H., Panahi, M., Singh, V.P.,
Chapi, K., Shirzadi, A., Panahi, S., Chen, W. and Bin Ahmad, B., 2018.
New hybrids of anfis with several optimization algorithms for flood
susceptibility modeling. Water, 10(9), p.1210.
[21] Zhou, Y., Guo, S. and Chang, F.J., 2019. Explore an evolutionary
recurrent ANFIS for modelling multi-step-ahead flood forecasts. Journal
of hydrology, 570, pp.343-355.
[22] Lipiwattanakarn, S. and Saengsawang, S., 2005. Performance
comparison of a conceptual hydrological model and a back-propagation
neural network model in rainfall-runoff modeling. Engineering Journal
of Research and Development, 16(1), pp.35-42.
[23] Padmawar, P.M., Shinde, A.S., Sayyed, T.Z., Shinde, S.K. and
Moholkar, K., 2019, July. Disaster prediction system using convolution
neural network. In 2019 International Conference on Communication
and Electronics Systems (ICCES) (pp. 808-812). IEEE.
[24] F.Y. Dtissibe, A.A.A. Ari, C. Titouna, O. Thiare, and A.M. Gueroui,
Flood forecasting based on an artificial neural network scheme. Natural
Hazards, vol. 104(2), pp.1211-1237, 2020.
[25] X. Wan, Q. Yang, P. Jiang, and P.A. Zhong, “A hybrid model for real-
time probabilistic flood forecasting using Elman neural network with
heterogeneity of error distributions,” Water Resources Management, vol.
33(11), pp.4027-4050, 2019.
[26] Y. Ding, Y. Zhu, J. Feng, P. Zhang, and Z. Cheng, “Interpretable spatio-
temporal attention LSTM model for flood forecasting,”
Neurocomputing, vol. 403, pp.348-359, 2020.