The Assessment of Rainfall Prediction Using Climate Models Results and Projections under Future Scenarios: the Machángara Tropical Andean Basin Case

Angel Vázquez-Patiño, Mario Peña, Alex Avilés


Rainfall is vital in the biosphere and predicting it is essential under the possible adverse effects of climate change. Rainfall behavior is linked to the availability of fresh water and the development of almost all the activities necessary for human subsistence. Therefore, knowing their patterns under future scenarios could help decision-makers to plan water use policies. This study used the random forest algorithm to predict rainfall in Chanlud and El Labrado stations, located in the tropical Machángara high mountain basin in Ecuador. Data from the Ecuador project's third national communication (TNC) were used to train the prediction models. First, those models' performance was analyzed to know which climate model results of the TNC provide more information to learn observed rainfall patterns. Then, the rainfall signal was projected under the RCP 4.5 and 8.5 scenarios. Among the most important results obtained, it stands out that the assembly results of the TNC provided the best information to learn rainfall patterns in the present. The performance is the best from January to July, but from August to December it is lower. Rainfall projections under RCP 8.5 are, in general, lower than under RCP 4.5. No significant trends were found in the future. However, a very slight increase (decrease) of rainfall was observed for the driest (wettest) months in both stations, although slightly more accentuated in El Labrado.


Machángara basin; rainfall prediction; random forest; climate models; projection; future scenarios; RCP.

Full Text:



P. D. Williams et al., “A Census of Atmospheric Variability From Seconds to Decades,” Geophys. Res. Lett., vol. 44, no. 21, Nov. 2017, doi: 10.1002/2017GL075483.

S. Trzaska and E. Schnarr, “A Review of Downscaling Methods for Climate Change Projections,” Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN), Burlington, Vermont, USA, 2014. [Online]. Available:

Ministerio del Ambiente del Ecuador, “Third National Communication of Ecuador on Climate Change (in Spanish),” MAE, Quito, Ecuador, 2017.

J. F. Farfán, K. Palacios, J. Ulloa, and A. Avilés, “A hybrid neural network-based technique to improve the flow forecasting of physical and data-driven models: Methodology and case studies in Andean watersheds,” J. Hydrol. Reg. Stud., vol. 27, p. 100652, Feb. 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.ejrh.2019.100652.

A. Avilés, A. Solera Solera, J. Paredes-Arquiola, and M. Pedro-Monzonís, “Integrated Methodological Framework for Assessing the Risk of Failure in Water Supply Incorporating Drought Forecasts. Case Study: Andean Regulated River Basin,” Water Resour. Manag., vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 1209–1223, Mar. 2018, doi: 10.1007/s11269-017-1863-7.

A. Avilés, K. Palacios, J. Pacheco, S. Jiménez, D. Zhiña, and O. Delgado, “Sensitivity exploration of water balance in scenarios of future changes: a case study in an Andean regulated river basin,” Theor. Appl. Climatol., vol. 141, no. 3–4, pp. 921–934, Aug. 2020, doi: 10.1007/s00704-020-03219-y.

K. E. Taylor, R. J. Stouffer, and G. A. Meehl, “An Overview of CMIP5 and the Experiment Design,” Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc., vol. 93, no. 4, pp. 485–498, Apr. 2012, doi: 10.1175/BAMS-D-11-00094.1.

J. G. Powers et al., “The Weather Research and Forecasting Model: Overview, System Efforts, and Future Directions,” Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc., vol. 98, no. 8, pp. 1717–1737, Aug. 2017, doi: 10.1175/BAMS-D-15-00308.1.

G. E. Armenta Porras, J. L. Villa Cedeño, and P. Jácome, “Proyecciones climáticas de precipitación y temperatura para Ecuador, bajo distintos escenarios de cambio climático,” Ministerio del Ambiente, Quito, Ecuador, 2016.

G. Esquivel‐Hernández et al., “Moisture transport and seasonal variations in the stable isotopic composition of rainfall in Central American and Andean Páramo during El Niño conditions (2015–2016),” Hydrol. Process., p. hyp.13438, Apr. 2019, doi: 10.1002/hyp.13438.

A. Vázquez-Patiño, L. Campozano, D. Ballari, M. Córdova, and E. Samaniego, “Virtual Control Volume Approach to the Study of Climate Causal Flows: Identification of Humidity and Wind Pathways of Influence on Rainfall in Ecuador,” Atmosphere (Basel)., vol. 11, no. 8, p. 848, Aug. 2020, doi: 10.3390/atmos11080848.

L. Breiman, “Random Forests,” Mach. Learn., vol. 45, no. 1, pp. 5–32, Jul. 2001, doi: 10.1023/A:1010933404324.

G. Karalis, “Decision Trees and Applications,” 2020, pp. 239–242.

P. Contreras, J. Orellana-Alvear, P. Muñoz, J. Bendix, and R. Célleri, “Influence of Random Forest Hyperparameterization on Short-Term Runoff Forecasting in an Andean Mountain Catchment,” Atmosphere (Basel)., vol. 12, no. 2, p. 238, Feb. 2021, doi: 10.3390/atmos12020238.

P. Muñoz, J. Orellana-Alvear, and R. Célleri, “Application of a Machine Learning Technique for Developing Short-Term Flood and Drought Forecasting Models in Tropical Mountainous Catchments,” 2021, pp. 11–35.

J. Orellana-Alvear, R. Célleri, R. Rollenbeck, and J. Bendix, “Optimization of X-Band Radar Rainfall Retrieval in the Southern Andes of Ecuador Using a Random Forest Model,” Remote Sens., vol. 11, no. 14, p. 1632, Jul. 2019, doi: 10.3390/rs11141632.

J. L. Speiser, M. E. Miller, J. Tooze, and E. Ip, “A comparison of random forest variable selection methods for classification prediction modeling,” Expert Syst. Appl., vol. 134, pp. 93–101, Nov. 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2019.05.028.

P. Probst, M. N. Wright, and A. Boulesteix, “Hyperparameters and tuning strategies for random forest,” Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Data Min. Knowl. Discov., vol. 9, no. 3, May 2019, doi: 10.1002/widm.1301.

P. Probst, A.-L. Boulesteix, and B. Bischl, “Tunability: importance of hyperparameters of machine learning algorithms,” J. Mach. Learn. Res., vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 1934–1965, 2019.

J. Bergstra and Y. Bengio, “Random Search for Hyper-Parameter Optimization,” J. Mach. Learn. Res., vol. 13, no. 10, pp. 281–305, 2012, [Online]. Available:

W. J. M. Knoben, J. E. Freer, and R. A. Woods, “Technical note: Inherent benchmark or not? Comparing Nash–Sutcliffe and Kling–Gupta efficiency scores,” Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., vol. 23, no. 10, pp. 4323–4331, Oct. 2019, doi: 10.5194/hess-23-4323-2019.

M. Peña, A. Vázquez-Patiño, D. Zhiña, M. Montenegro, and A. Avilés, “Improved Rainfall Prediction through Nonlinear Autoregressive Network with Exogenous Variables: A Case Study in Andes High Mountain Region,” Adv. Meteorol., vol. 2020, pp. 1–17, Sep. 2020, doi: 10.1155/2020/1828319.



  • There are currently no refbacks.

Published by INSIGHT - Indonesian Society for Knowledge and Human Development