The authors wish to thank the discussers for their inputs on our work Sivapragasam et al. (2008). The discussion is clarified as below: The authors agree that linear genetic programming has been employed in the study, though the description of genetic programming given in Sivapragasam et al. ( 2008
Comment on ‘Sivapragasam C, Maheswaran R, Venkatesh V. 2008. Genetic programming approach for flood routing in natural channels. Hydrological Processes 22: 623–628’
✍ Scribed by A. H. Alavi; A. H. Gandomi; M. Gandomi
- Publisher
- John Wiley and Sons
- Year
- 2010
- Tongue
- English
- Weight
- 47 KB
- Volume
- 24
- Category
- Article
- ISSN
- 0885-6087
- DOI
- 10.1002/hyp.7511
No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.
✦ Synopsis
The discussers wish to thank the authors for examining the potential of the application of genetic programming (GP) for constructing a routing model for a channel reach along the Walla Walla River, USA. The discussers would like to present the following important viewpoints, which the authors and potential researchers need to consider. The discussion shall focus on main points that are not considered in the study.
Descriptions given on page 625 and Figure 2 of the paper studied by Sivapragasam et al. (2008) clearly indicate that the method utilized for constructing a routing model for a channel reach is a tree-based genetic programming (TGP) approach. TGP was introduced by Koza (1992) as an extension of the genetic algorithms, in which programs are represented as tree structures and expressed in the functional programming language, LISP (Koza, 1992). Besides the traditional tree-based representations, there are linear and graph representations (Banzhaf et al., 1998;Poli et al., 2007).
According to the last paragraph of descriptions of GP on page 625, the software package Discipulus , which is developed by Conrads et al. (1998), was applied to the flood routing in natural channels problem. Discipulus is a machine-code-based, linear genetic programming (LGP) software (
📜 SIMILAR VOLUMES
## Abstract In recognition of the non‐linear relationship between storage and discharge existing in most river systems, non‐linear forms of the Muskingum model have been proposed, together with methods to calibrate the model parameters. However, most studies have focused only on routing a typical h