See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/386054926

Application of Machine Learning Algorithms in Predicting Extreme Rainfall

Events in Rwanda

Article in Atmosphere · June 2024

CITATIONS READS

0 58

6 authors, including:

Giri Kattel Kazora Jonah

University of Melbourne Nanjing University of Information Science and Technology
83 PUBLICATIONS 844 CITATIONS 30 PUBLICATIONS 74 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Fabien Habiyakare Rami Kamak

Nanjing University of Information Science and Technology 95 PUBLICATIONS 143 CITATIONS
4 PUBLICATIONS 3 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Rami Kamak on 23 November 2024.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 atmosphere

Article
Application of Machine Learning Algorithms in Predicting
Extreme Rainfall Events in Rwanda
James Kagabo 1,2 , Giri Raj Kattel 3,4,5, * , Jonah Kazora 1,2 , Charmant Nicolas Shangwe 6 and Fabien Habiyakare 1,2

1 School of Atmospheric Sciences, Nanjing University of Information Science & Technology, Nanjing 210044,
China; [email protected] (J.K.); [email protected] (J.K.);
[email protected] (F.H.)
2 Rwanda Meteorology Agency (Meteo Rwanda), Kigali P.O. BOX 898, Rwanda
3 School of Geographical Sciences, Nanjing University of Information Science & Technology,
Nanjing 210044, China
4 Department of Infrastructure Engineering, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne 3010, Australia
5 Department of Hydraulic Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China
6 School of Computer and Software, Nanjing University of Information Science & Technology, Nanjing 210044,
China; [email protected]
* Correspondence: [email protected]

Abstract: Precipitation is an essential component of the hydrological cycle that directly affects human
lives. An accurate and early detection of a future rainfall event can help prevent social, environmental,
and economic losses. Traditional methods for accurate rainfall prediction have faltered due to their
weakness in quantifying nonlinear climatic conditions as they involve numerical weather prediction
using radar to solve complex mathematical equations based on contemporary meteorological data.
This study aims to develop a precise rainfall forecast model using machine learning (ML), and
this model focuses on long short-term memory (LSTM) to enhance rainfall prediction accuracy. In
recent years, machine learning (ML) algorithms have emerged as powerful tools for predicting
extreme weather phenomena worldwide. For instance, long short-term memory (LSTM) is a forecast
model that effectively estimates the amount of precipitation based on historical data. We analyzed
85,470 pieces of daily rainfall data from 1983 to 2021 collected from each of four synoptic stations in
Citation: Kagabo, J.; Kattel, G.R.; Rwanda (Kigali Aero, Ruhengeri Aero, Kamembe Aero, and Gisenyi Aero). Advanced ML algorithms,
Kazora, J.; Shangwe, C.N.;
including convolutional neural networks (CNNs), gated recurrent units (GRUs), and LSTM, were
Habiyakare, F. Application of
applied to predict extreme rainfall events. LSTM outperforms the CNN and GRU with 99.7%, 99.8%,
Machine Learning Algorithms in
and 99.7% accuracy. LSTM’s ability to filter out noise showed important patterns by handling
Predicting Extreme Rainfall Events in
Rwanda. Atmosphere 2024, 15, 691.
irregularities in rainfall data to improve forecast results. Our outcomes have significant implications
https://doi.org/10.3390/ for disaster preparedness and risk mitigation efforts in Rwanda, where frequent natural disasters,
atmos15060691 including floods, pose a challenge. Our research also demonstrates the superiority of LSTM-based
ML algorithms in predicting extreme rainfall events, highlighting their potential to enhance disaster
Academic Editors: Kathleen Beyer,
risk resilience and preparedness strategies in Rwanda.
Fei Ji and Jaroslaw Krzywanski

Received: 7 March 2024 Keywords: artificial intelligence; machine learning; LSTM; rainfall prediction; flood; Rwanda
Revised: 31 May 2024
Accepted: 4 June 2024
Published: 6 June 2024

1. Introduction
Climate change has unleashed a wide range of impacts on nature and society, pro-
Copyright: © 2024 by the authors.
foundly altering economies worldwide [1]. The impacts are associated with rising global
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. temperatures, melting ice and glaciers followed by a sea-level rise, and extreme weather
This article is an open access article events [2–4]. Studies suggest that the frequency of impacts is expected to be intensified and
distributed under the terms and worsen in the future due to ongoing climate warming [5,6]. It is, however, becoming in-
conditions of the Creative Commons creasingly difficult to understand the dynamics of global climate change and the challenges
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// posed by such changes due to the complexity of natural and societal interactions, which
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ are mostly nonlinear in nature [7]. Hence, this requires collective efforts including compre-
4.0/). hensive research to prevent or reduce the impact of climate change on nature and society

Atmosphere 2024, 15, 691. https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos15060691 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/atmosphere

Atmosphere 2024, 15, 691 2 of 22

at all scales including national, regional, and global, so that adaptation to change can be
made possible to achieve if there are collective efforts to combat global climate impacts [8].
Among several challenges brought by the changes in the global climatic conditions, feeding
the world’s seven billion people today, and as high as nine billion people by the end of 2050,
is becoming the most urgent and difficult to address [9]. Today, the unprecedented rates
of population growth and urbanization have caused severe problems in accessing water
for drinking, sanitation and irrigation, and the overall security of food due to an increased
demand [7], consequently degrading the standard of people’s lives worldwide [10].
The African continent is one of the areas of the world exposed to demographic, social,
and environmental challenges in the 21st century. The majority of African countries have
faced rapid population growth and food shortages [11], followed by poverty and overall
low standards of well-being [12,13]. In the meantime, African people experience extreme
climatic variability and associated risks posed by temperature rises [14]. Climate variability
and weather extremes in Rwanda, for example, suggest that the country has experienced
significant climate warming impacts on natural and social systems [15]. According to a
report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) [6], most African regions,
especially sub-Saharan countries, have experienced extreme heatwave events that have
resulted in high human mortality and morbidity [16,17]. The occurrence of climate-related
food-borne, vector-borne, and other water-borne diseases in African regions is becoming
very high and, lately, some chronic mental health (illness) challenges have emerged, and
they are often associated with increased climate warming episodes leading to people’s
displacement from Africa to elsewhere [18].
Rwanda, a relatively small country in area in eastern Africa, has shown a significant
increase in temperature over the last century, with a particularly notable warming trend
since the 1980s [19]. This has been attributed to factors such as urbanization, industrial-
ization, and the potential extremities of climate change drivers, including increased fossil
fuel burning and carbon dioxide emissions [19,20]. Recently, the impact of the temperature
increases on agriculture, health, water resources, infrastructure, pollution, and energy in
Rwanda, as well as other countries on the African continent, has been reported by various
studies [21,22]. For instance, the climate projection in Rwanda suggests that the country
will experience a trend towards warmer and wetter weather in future [23,24].
Recently, Rwanda has witnessed more destructive extreme precipitation events and
flooding episodes that have become a real threat to human settlements in different parts of
the country. Hence, so far, no studies have focused on predicting rainfall events in Rwanda
to date. It is imperative to find an appropriate research method that can employ machine
learning (ML) to accurately predict rainfall events and safeguard the country’s economy.
Rainfall plays a pivotal role in shaping the social, economic, and environmental
landscapes of countries around the world; extreme rainfall also brings natural and societal
instability. As a country situated in the East African region that is largely dependent on
agriculture, rainfall is becoming the most essential component for irrigation and drinking
that shapes the overall economy of Rwanda [15,25]. However, the increased frequencies
of extreme rainfall events on the African continent (including Rwanda) over the past
decade have had far-reaching consequences such as devastating floods, landslides, and
droughts [26,27]. The extreme events in Rwanda are often characterized by intensity and
unpredictability, which can lead to the further severity of natural disasters and crop failure,
posing significant challenges for food security and public safety [11,28].
Traditional methods, including the empirical method, weather chart analysis, and
numerical weather prediction (NWP), have been applied to combat natural disasters world-
wide. But they often showed a relative weakness in model accuracy as well as timely
rainfall prediction, spatial resolution, and seasonal transitions forecasting. For instance, in
2010–2011, Rwanda witnessed numerous instances of landslides and flash floods attributed
to heavy rainfall in specific agricultural and human-dominated areas, including Musanze,
Burera in the north, Rusizi, Rustiro, and Nyabihu in the west, leading to devastation of resi-
dences and crop yields, along with the unfortunate loss of lives [29]. On 2–3 May 2023, a to-
Atmosphere 2024, 15, 691 3 of 22

tal of 131 people died, thousands were displaced, and numerous properties were destroyed
due to heavy rainfall and floods in the western and northern provinces of Rwanda [30]. The
use of conventional methods was not found to be highly relevant. The country witnesses
intense convective storms due to changes in tropical highland climates and atmospheric
saturation due to the rapid uplift of warm and moist air [31]. The topography, especially
the mountains, alters rainfall patterns, further making accurate rainfall prediction complex
in Rwanda. As a result, extreme weather events exacerbated by various climatic processes
and the severity of their impacts are becoming unpredictable worldwide [32,33]. Hence,
accurate rainfall forecasting is becoming a significant task for managing water resources,
infrastructure, agriculture, and natural disasters in Rwanda [34,35].
Traditional climate and weather prediction methods in Rwanda face limitations in
predicting extreme events more accurately, posing further challenges for the management
of a range of disasters, including flooding [36,37]. Previous models that include: Weather
research and forecasting model (WRF), PRECIS (Providing Regional Climates for Impacts
Studies), ECMWF (European Centre for Medium Range Weather Forecasting), and GFS
(Global Forecast System), as indicated by ICPAC, have been used in medium range and
seasonal forecasting; however, there has been a challenge in accurately predicting daily
rainfall [38].
Lately, the use of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) algorithms has
gained interest among modelers in accurately predicting daily rainfall, as employed for
the first time in Rwanda. Analysis of large historical datasets followed by identification
of patterns and trends to enhance the predictive capabilities of the model using the AI
and ML that are becoming significant as they have indicated positive signs of improving
rainfall forecasts in Rwanda [39,40]. However, such an advancement in ML has been
possible only due to the persistent research efforts being made in environmental modeling
using AI [40,41]. For instance, a GRU was used to investigate the climatic impact on
soil wetness in the drought-intensified districts of Odisha, India [42], LSTM was used to
understand the distribution pattern of short-range rainfall in Ghana, West Africa, and
the daily rainfall prediction in Jimma, southwestern Oromia, Ethiopia was generated by
machine learning modeling [43–45]. Further, the CNN model, an artificial intelligence
approach, was successfully used for groundwater mapping in Hubei region, China and
flood forecasting in North region, Cameroon [46,47]. Although all these models were used
for different purposes, they markedly improved environmental management including
climate extremes in the given country. However, most ML algorithms suggest an ongoing
research effort is needed for comprehensive understanding of the climate model, including
feature selection and data preparation.
The machine learning algorithms, such as decision trees, LSTM, K-means, CNNs, and
linear regression, employed for climate change studies in the African continent and other
countries have shown a promising applicability in the management of the environment,
including weather forecasting. For example, the LSTM algorithm has shown as high as
99.72% accuracy in predicting rainfall for 60 days in Jimma, Ethiopia [43], offering potential
solutions for timely preparedness and impact reduction [48]. The LSTM architecture is
one of the recurrent neural network (RNN) approaches intended to solve the vanishing
gradient issue with conventional RNNs [49]. The LSTM, GRU, and CNN models have
unique strengths and weaknesses for rainfall prediction. The GRU is computationally
efficient but may struggle with long-term dependencies [50]. CNNs excel in spatial pattern
recognition but may not capture complex temporal relationships [51]. LSTM, on the other
hand, captures long-term dependencies and adapts to data time series. LSTM is determined
by three main gates, the forget gate, input gate, and output gate. The forget gate discards
information from the previous state, the input gate stores new information, and the output
gate determines the next information and hidden state from the current cell to the output
based on the updated state [52]. Given the ongoing climate warming conditions, the
LSTM algorithm may provide a distinctive opportunity to improve the understanding and
prediction of extreme rainfall events in Rwanda. Therefore, Rwanda urgently requires
Atmosphere 2024, 15, 691 4 of 22

a sophisticated and powerful ML algorithm such as LSTM to tackle a range of complex

hydro-metro-related disasters [52,53] through an accurate prediction of rainfall to mitigate
flood risks. This research aims to study the best performing model and predict extreme
rainfall in Rwanda, primarily by analyzing the patterns of geographical and temporal
data, followed by using effective machine learning algorithms. This study is expected
to contribute to transforming community behavior into disaster preparedness, climate
mitigation, and adaptation in Rwanda.

2. Study Area
Rwanda lies within the latitude of 3◦ –1◦ S and longitude of 28.75◦ –31◦ E and has been
influenced by tropical and equatorial climates. Being positioned near the equator in between
Central and East Africa, Rwanda experiences a wet climate. The country is bordered by
Uganda in the north, Tanzania in the east, the Democratic Republic of the Congo in the
west, and Burundi in the south Figure 1, so it has diversity in the political and natural
systems, including the topographic hills, plateaus, volcanoes, and the Congo Nile valley
that overlays Kivu Lake. Part of the Rwandan topography contains volcanic mountains
with altitudes ranging between 900 and 4507 meters in the north and northwest, while the
east is largely dominated by lowland. Characterized by numerous hills and mountains,
the center and southern parts of Rwanda range from 1500 to 2000 m [54]. The northwest
region contains the Virunga Mountains, which include Mount Karisimbi and mount Bisoke,
known for their diverse landscape, forests, and rich in biodiversity [55]. Low lying regions,
Atmosphere 2024, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 23
particularly in the east, are characterized by savannas, grasslands, wetlands, and marshes,
collectively contributing to the country’s ecological and agricultural richness [56].

Figure 1.
Figure 1. Geographical
Geographical map
map of
of Rwanda
Rwanda with
with district
district boundaries,
boundaries, waterbodies,
waterbodies, and
and elevation.
elevation.

Being a mountainous
This indicates landlocked
the yearly country
temperature in the
in the Greatlowland
eastern Lakes region
rangesoffrom
Africa,
19 with
to 22 the
°C,
total 2 and water area of 1390 km2 Figure 1, Rwanda also experiences a
with land area
740 to 26,338
1000 mm kmof precipitation; the central plateau region experiences a yearly rain-
fall of 1100 to 1300 mm and temperatures between 18 and 20 °C. The Congo-Nile Ridge
and volcanic mountains are among the highlands that see temperatures between 10 and
14° C and 1300 and 1550 mm of precipitation a year. The Bugarama lowlands and the
vicinity of Lake Kivu experience typical yearly temperatures of 14 to 18 °C and 1200 to
1550 mm of rainfall [58,59].
Atmosphere 2024, 15, 691 5 of 22

pleasing moderate and tropical climate [19,57]. The climatology of Rwanda suggests that
the country experiences 1170.2 mm of precipitation annually. In high-altitude regions, low
temperatures are observed with typical temperatures between 15 ◦ C and 17 ◦ C. Areas of
intermediate height, whose typical temperatures range from 19 ◦ C to 21 ◦ C, have moderate
temperatures. The lowlands in the east and southwest experience warmer temperatures.
Rainfall in the east and southeast is roughly >900 mm, whereas in the north and northwest
volcanic highland areas it can reach 1500 mm. The extreme events vary depending on
the region, prevailing weather patterns, landscape, and land use in Rwanda; the country
experiences two rainy seasons, mainly March to May and September to December. The
temporal distribution of rainfall during the decade shows a bimodal system of rainy periods,
where the long rain season is March, April, and May (MAM) and the short rain season
is September, October, November, and December (SOND); there is a dry spell between
January and February (JF) and a dry season in June, July, and August (JJA) [55].
This indicates the yearly temperature in the eastern lowland ranges from 19 to 22 ◦ C,
with 740 to 1000 mm of precipitation; the central plateau region experiences a yearly rainfall
of 1100 to 1300 mm and temperatures between 18 and 20 ◦ C. The Congo-Nile Ridge and
volcanic mountains are among the highlands that see temperatures between 10 and 14◦ C
and 1300 and 1550 mm of precipitation a year. The Bugarama lowlands and the vicinity of
Lake Kivu experience typical yearly temperatures of 14 to 18 ◦ C and 1200 to 1550 mm of
rainfall [58,59].
Atmosphere 2024, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 23
The climatology analysis of Rwanda presented in Figure 2 relies on historical tempera-
ture and rainfall data from 1981 to 2019.

Figure 2.
Figure 2. Spatial
Spatialclimatological
climatologicalofofvariation
variationover
overRwanda.
Rwanda.(a) (a)
Temperature (°C)(◦ variation
Temperature andand
C) variation (b)
rainfall (mm) distribution from 1981 to 2019.
(b) rainfall (mm) distribution from 1981 to 2019.

3. Materials and
Figure 2a Methods
shows temperature variations between 13 ◦ C and 27 ◦ C per decade, as
indicated by the mean
Computational temperature,
methods which increased
that empower machines to over thefrom
learn period from
data 1981–2019.
automatically
Figure
and make2b shows the spatial
predictions distribution
without explicit of rainfall variation
programing for eachwhere
step northern and western
were selected in this
regions of Rwanda
study; these include receive heavy rainfallneural
the convolutional causing devastations
network (CNN), such as short-term
long landslides and flash
memory
floods,
(LSTM),while eastern
and gated and southeastern
recurrent unit (GRU).parts of the country
The methods receive lowfor
and mechanisms rainfall andma-
applying are
mostly influenced by prolonged drought, causing a greater impact on agricultural
chine learning algorithms for predicting climate variability and weather extremes will in- practices
and
cludewater resource management.
data collection Although
and data mining. Weather theand
maximum and minimum
climatic data rainfall
were collected fromofvar-
the
country looks relatively normal (from 79 to 382.3 mm/decade), the extremity of
ious sources, including weather stations, satellite data, and other sources within Rwanda.rainfall is
often high in Rwanda. Also, from being a country of a thousand hills, especially in the steep
and rocky terrain of western parts and the semi-arid region of east, this has been influenced
3.1. Data
Climate data were collected from various sources, including weather stations,
CHIRPS (Climate Hazards Group Infrared Precipitation with Station data), and ERA5
(Fifth generation of the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF)
reanalysis), to ensure precision in extreme estimates, quality data, and no missing values.
The Rwanda Meteorology Agency provided daily rainfall and maximum and minimum
Atmosphere 2024, 15, 691 6 of 22

by unprecedented hazardous events. It is important to accurately predict rainfall events in

the region as they put human lives in danger, damage infrastructure, reduce agricultural
productivity, and foster an environment that is prone to pests and diseases.

3. Materials and Methods

Computational methods that empower machines to learn from data automatically and
make predictions without explicit programing for each step were selected in this study;
these include the convolutional neural network (CNN), long short-term memory (LSTM),
and gated recurrent unit (GRU). The methods and mechanisms for applying machine
learning algorithms for predicting climate variability and weather extremes will include
data collection and data mining. Weather and climatic data were collected from various
sources, including weather stations, satellite data, and other sources within Rwanda.

3.1. Data
Climate data were collected from various sources, including weather stations, CHIRPS
(Climate Hazards Group Infrared Precipitation with Station data), and ERA5 (Fifth genera-
tion of the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) reanalysis),
to ensure precision in extreme estimates, quality data, and no missing values. The Rwanda
Meteorology Agency provided daily rainfall and maximum and minimum temperature
data from four synoptic weather stations: Kigali Aero, Kamembe Aero, Gisenyi Aero,
and Ruhengeri Aero (Table 1) for thirty-nine years. Observation, CHIRPS data, and the
CDT GitHub dataset from 1983 to 2021 were used to predict seasonal rainfall. The UCSB
CHIRPS v2p0 daily precipitation satellite-derived dataset with a high grid resolution of
0.05◦ × 0.05◦ from 1983 to 2021 was utilized [58]. The data were then being reprocessed
to remove noise, missing values, and all other errors to prepare the data for analysis. The
precipitation data were obtained from the International Research Institute for Climate and
Society (IRI)/Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory (LDEO) climate data library of the United
States of America and are archived at the following link: https://iridl.ldeo.columbia.edu/
SOURCES/.UCSB/.CHIRPS/.v2p0/.monthly/.global/.precipitation/ (accessed on 27 De-
cember 2023). Several studies have made considerable use of the CHIRPS dataset because
of its increased authenticity [60–62]. The mean sea level pressure data for the period from
1983 to 2021 were sourced (http://iridl.ldeo.columbia.edu/SOURCES/.NOAA/.NCEP-
NCAR/.CDAS-1/.DAILY/.Intrinsic/.MSL/.pressure/datafiles.html, accessed on 27 De-
cember 2023) (NOAA-NCEP-NCAR (2.5◦ × 2.5◦ ) based in Boulder, Colorado United States
of America (USA). Additionally, daily meridional and zonal wind and the relative humidity
at 850 hPa were acquired from the ERA 5 [63,64] at: https://cds.climate.copernicus.eu/
cdsapp#!/dataset/reanalysis-era5-pressure-levels?tab=form, accessed on 27 December
2023. Maximum and minimum temperatures were obtained from the National Meteorolog-
ical and Hydrological Service (NMHS) of Rwanda. These datasets have a high spatial and
temporal resolution of 0.25◦ × 0.25◦ from 1983 to 2021 and data.

Table 1. Selected stations with their latitude and longitude locations that were used in this study.

Station Latitude Longitude

Kigali Aero −1.95◦ 30.11◦
Kamembe Aero −2.46◦ 28.91◦
Gisenyi Aero −1.68◦ 29.26◦
Ruhengeri Aero −1.48◦ 29.61◦

3.2. Methods
Different machine learning (ML) approaches such as random forest, gradient boosting
classifier, Gaussian native Bayes model, training decision tree, and long short-term memory
have all shown a significant model outputs, i.e., 79.50%, 80.87%, 84.15%, 72.40, and 99.72%,
respectively, in various studies [43,63]. For this study, LSTM was employed given its
suitability. This was used to predict rainfall extremes in Rwanda following the comparison
Atmosphere 2024, 15, 691 7 of 22

that was made with the GRU and CNN models. When doing this, input vectors of data
time series were fed into the LSTM layer and classified as the technical machine learning
algorithm based on the probabilistic approach and Gaussian distribution. Each parameter
(also known as features or predictors) was presumed to have an independent ability to
predict the output of the variable [44]. The LSTM was the most effective network for
capturing long-term dependencies in sequential data, consequently making it the most
well-suited approach for a variety of tasks over time.

3.2.1. Algorithm Selection and Training

This module involves selecting the appropriate machine learning algorithm for pre-
dicting rainfall extremes in Rwanda, based on the performance, characteristics of the data,
and the specific research questions. Popular algorithms include decision trees, GRU, CNN,
and support vector machines [41].
In this study, three deep learning algorithms (CNN, LSTM, and GRU) were employed,
and a structured data preparation process was followed. This process encompassed data
selection, checking, and filtering. Secondly, preprocessing was used for data testing,
assimilation, and feature engineering. Subsequently, ensemble ML was conducted through
model training, parameterization, and statistical downscaling. Each model underwent
Atmosphere 2024, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 23
testing to assess its performance; the results were analyzed based on the learning model
output (Figure 3).

Figure Conceptualframework
3. Conceptual
Figure 3. framework that
that indicates
indicates data
data preprocessing
preprocessing and and testing
testing formachine
for the the machine
learn-
learning algorithm
ing algorithm [65]. [65].

3.2.2. Statistical Methods

3.2.2. Statistical Methods
In choosing the most suitable algorithm to predict different rainfall events accurately,
In choosing the most suitable algorithm to predict different rainfall events accurately,
it is advisable to utilize a linear statistical model. This model establishes a straight-line
it is advisable to utilize a linear statistical model. This model establishes a straight-line
relationship between the dependent variable (Y) and one or more independent variables
relationship between the dependent variable (Y) and one or more independent variables
(X), as described below.
(X), as described below.
Y = β0 + β1X + ε (1)
X is the predictive variable (input 𝑌 =data)
𝛽0 +to𝛽1𝑋 + 𝜀 Y and ε is random variable. (1)
predict Y
denotes the dependent variable, while X is the independent variable; β0 is the y-intercept,
X is the predictive variable (input data) to predict Y and ε is random variable. Y de-
β1 is the
notes theslope of the line,
dependent and εwhile
variable, is theXerror
is theterm representing
independent the difference
variable; β0 is thebetween the
y-intercept,
actual rainfall
β1 is the slopeand the line,
of the predicted
and εvalue.
is the The
errorLSTM
termarchitecture
representingis the
onedifference
of the recurrent neural
between the
actual rainfall and the predicted value. The LSTM architecture is one of the recurrent neu-
ral networks (RNNs) intended to solve the vanishing gradient issue with the conventional
RNNs; a hyper parameter is essential in balancing the complexity and generalization in
LSTM model optimization to achieve accurate predictions and preventing overfitting. It
entails modifying learning rates, training epochs, and batch size, allowing an increased
Atmosphere 2024, 15, 691 8 of 22

networks (RNNs) intended to solve the vanishing gradient issue with the conventional
RNNs; a hyper parameter is essential in balancing the complexity and generalization in
LSTM model optimization to achieve accurate predictions and preventing overfitting. It
entails modifying learning rates, training epochs, and batch size, allowing an increased
learning rate. In a variety of applications, the optimal performance is ensured by proper
tuning. LSTM was employed to analyze weather parameters and make rainfall predictions
based on input parameter values. In our study, the architecture underwent adjustment
after a comprehensive hyper parameter tuning process.
Regarding the neural network components, the vanishing gradient problem was
solved with gated recurrent units. GRUs regulate the information flow through gating
processes [64]. By deciding which data should be kept in the network’s internal state and
which should be sent to the output, these gates help the model better represent depen-
dencies for sequences of different lengths [66]. While training data, various procedures
are adopted. With regard to the strategy of the batch normalization, which is a widely
adopted technique that enables faster and more stable training of deep neural networks, it
reduces the number of training epochs required for building deep networks [67,68]. With
regard to the dense data layer, which enhances the performance of different neural network
topologies during training and testing with varying optimization losses and activation
functions, each neuron receives input from all of the neurons in the previous layer [69]. The
artificial neural networks (ANNs) rely heavily on the activation function, which gives the
model nonlinearity and allows it to recognize intricate patterns and relationships in the
data. The rectified linear unit (ReLU) activation function was used in the deep learning
model that was discussed by Srivastava. By using a regularization method for reducing
overfitting and enhancing generalization performance in neural networks, we applied
“dropout”. Over the course of training, a subset of layer outputs randomly drops out
and a portion of the neurons in a layer are randomly deactivated; this mimics training
several neural networks with various topologies concurrently [70]. A one-dimensional
convolutional layer referred to as Conv1d in neural network terminology is usually used
for sequences or time-series data and carries out convolution operations along one dimen-
sion. The output layer is responsible for producing the final prediction or output of the
neural network based on the learned features from the preceding layers. Its structure and
activation function are determined by the specific requirements of the task at hand. The
LSTM incorporates several gates and activation functions to manage and update the cell
state and hidden state; the suggested model makes use of sigmoid and tanh, which are the
endemic activation functions of neural networks, and discusses an innovative technique to
improve the outcomes in number of ways. It is calculated for an input gate It , Ot = output
gate, δ = sigmoid, Ft = forget gate, C′ t = candidate vector, Ct = cell state, and hidden state
ht [71].
It = sigmoid(Wt [ X (t), ht−1 ] + bt ) (2)
 
Ft = sigmoid W f [ht−1 , X (t)] + b f (3)

Ot = sigmoid(Wo [ht−1 , X (t)] + bt ) (4)

C ′ t = tanh(Wc [ht−1 , X (t)] + bc


(5)
Ct = Ft × Ct−1 + It × C ′ t (6)
ht = Ot × tanh(Ct ) (7)
As mentioned previously, the LSTM architecture itself makes use of the sigmoid and
tanh functions; nevertheless, there are several issues with the activation functions that
LSTM employs. The preceding section further provides this model’s challenges. Learning
continues with neurons engaged throughout the training phase when the gradient is held
at specific levels of backpropagation, hence avoiding the vanishing gradient problem [72].
To address the gradient issues that arise during backpropagation, sigmoid-weighted linear
units were suggested, as these units multiply the input value by the sigmoid activation
Atmosphere 2024, 15, 691 9 of 22

function. With this as its central concept, intensified LSTM was created. The cell state is a
state created to retain historical data and simulate human brain decision making. LSTM
uses tanh functions and sigmoid functions to update previous cell states when an operation
is carried out. This is the point at which we genuinely removed outdated data and added
current data. However, multiplying the input values by the forget and output gates was
unusable as they determine input retention and prediction. As a result, it is evident that the
input gate and candidate vector are crucial in maintaining the cell state vector, which the
LSTM uses to absorb new data and perform analysis to forecast the output value given the
current input. This is the basis for multiplying the input value by the candidate vector’s
tanh function and the input gate’s sigmoid function [73].
Figure 4 shows the structural representation of the suggested intensified LSTM model.
It is evident that the cyclical relationship between the input and hidden layer is captured by
a more intricate structure in LSTM. It is possible to acquire the same output as an ordinary
RNN [74] with an input Gate (I) function multiplied by the input; the forget gate is a
sigmoid activation function; the candidate vector (C′ ) with tanh is the activation function
Atmosphere 2024, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 23
multiplied by the input; the output gate (O) with tanh activation function; the hidden
state (h) with hidden state vector; and the memory state (C) is with the memory state
vector. The whole
state vector. LSTMLSTM
The whole architecture is made
architecture up of the
is made three
up of the input gates,gates,
three input whichwhich
eliminates
elim-
unnecessary information, while the output gate chooses what data to output.
inates unnecessary information, while the output gate chooses what data to output. The input
The
gate
input also
gatechooses whetherwhether
also chooses to allowtonew input;
allow newallinput;
these all
inputs operate
these inputswithin thewithin
operate range the
of
0range
to 1. These three analog gates are based on the sigmoid function.
of 0 to 1. These three analog gates are based on the sigmoid function.

Figure4.4.LSTM
Figure LSTMflow
flowchart
chartshowing
showinginput
inputand
andoutput
outputgates.
gates.

Hence,h(t)
Hence, h(t)==O(t)
O(t)⋅tanh C(t);the
·tanh C(t); theX(t)
X(t)isisthe
theinput
inputat attime
timestep
stept,t,h(t)
h(t)isisthe
thehidden
hiddenstate
state
atattime
timestep
stept,t,C(t)
C(t)isisthe
thecell
cellstate
stateatattime
timestep
stept,t,I(t),
I(t),F(t),
F(t),and
andO(t)
O(t)are
arethe
theinput
inputand
andforget
forget
vectorsand
vectors andY(t)
Y(t)isisoutput
outputgategatevector,
vector,respectively.
respectively.This Thismodel
modelarchitecture
architectureisismademadeup upofof
threeinput
three inputgates,
gates, which
which eliminates
eliminates unnecessary
unnecessary information
information while
while the outputthe gate
output gate
chooses
chooses
what datawhat data to
to output. output.
The input The
gateinput
choosesgate chooses
whether towhether
allow new to input;
allow allnew input;within
operate all op-
erate
the within
range of 0the range
to 1. These of 0three
to 1.analog
These three
gatesanalog
are basedgatesonarethebased
sigmoidon the sigmoid
function function
[73].
[73].
3.2.3. Arithmetic Operations
3.2.3.The
Arithmetic
findings ofOperations
the prediction accuracy were obtained using the data remaining for the
trainingThe findings of thephase,
after the testing whichaccuracy
prediction was based on the
were deep learning
obtained approach.
using the The results
data remaining for
show
the training after the testing phase, which was based on the deep learning approach.The
how effectively the suggested model would work to reduce all kinds of errors. The
percentage
results show of the
how dependent variable’s
effectively variance
the suggested that can
model be predicted
would from theallindependent
work to reduce kinds of er-
variables
rors. The is the coefficient
percentage of theofdependent
determination. Thevariance
variable’s mean absolute
that canerror (MAE) equation
be predicted from the
(8),
independent variables is the coefficient of determination. The mean absolute error(RMSE)
the coefficient of determination equation (9), and the root mean square error (MAE)
equation (8), the coefficient of determination equation (9), and the root mean square error
(RMSE) equation (10) were the metrics validated to assess the models’ performances
[43,63],[75]. The coefficient of determination interprets the proportion of observed y vari-
ation that can be explained by the simple linear regression model attributed to an approx-
imate linear relationship between y and x; it is denoted by R2. The mean absolute error
Atmosphere 2024, 15, 691 10 of 22

equation (10) were the metrics validated to assess the models’ performances [43,63,75].
The coefficient of determination interprets the proportion of observed y variation that can
be explained by the simple linear regression model attributed to an approximate linear
relationship between y and x; it is denoted by R2 . The mean absolute error (MAE) is a
metric used to evaluate a regression model’s effectiveness, it measures the average absolute
difference between the predicted values and the actual values in the dataset. The root mean
square error is the “square root of the average of squared errors” [76].

1 n
n i∑
MAE = |yi − ŷi | (8)
=1

2
∑i (yi − ŷi )
R2 = 1 − 2
(9)
∑i ( yi − y )
s
1 n
n i∑
RMSE = ( x i − y i )2 (10)
=1

where n is the sample size, xi is the model’s simulated daily rainfall, yi denotes the dataset’s
i-th observed value, and ŷ is the predicted value.

4. Results
4.1. Training Dataset Development, Validation, and Rainfall Forecast
The use of ML algorithms in our study on rainfall data in Rwanda has become poten-
tially significant for climate change predictions including the rainfall forecast. A dataset
including a daily record of the weather parameters from 1983 to 2021 was used and ac-
counted for record length, data continuity, and a contemporaneous period of observation.
The consistency of the meteorological data was also validated. During data preprocessing,
no missing values were detected. Parameters such as pressure, wind speed, relative humid-
ity, and the maximum and minimum temperatures were used as inputs, while precipitation
was the output. The training dataset comprised approximately 70% of the data from 1983 to
2009, the testing dataset covered ratio of 20% from 2010 to 2018, and the validation dataset
comprised 10% from 2019 to 2021.

4.2. Model Performance on Rainfall Forecast

The loss plot of the rainfall forecast model throughout the training process was compa-
rable for both the training and validation datasets. The three fundamental scoring metrics
(RMSE, MAE, and R2 ) were used to assess the suggested model. Using these scoring metrics
helps to evaluate the effectiveness of predictive models and offers valuable insights into
various facets of model performance, including accuracy, error magnitude, and explanatory
power. Comparing these metrics significantly contributes to validating and establishing the
model’s predictive capabilities, thereby increasing confidence in its practical application. A
128-neuron long short-term memory model was used to present the experimental results.
We evaluated the network’s prediction accuracy using data that were not included in the
training phase, in addition to utilizing the suggested deep-learning-based daily rainfall
prediction model. The performance of the proposed model during training and validation
is shown in Figure 5. This figure presents the loss curves of the model over four epochs at
four different synoptic weather stations including Kigali, Kamembe, Gisenyi, and Ruhen-
geri. The training loss (blue) decreases significantly, indicating successful learning from
the training data, while the (orange) curve denotes the validation loss. The convergence
of both loss curves without a significant increase in validation loss is indicative of good
generalization and an absence of overfitting. We also assessed the suggested model’s pre-
diction ability with a testing dataset; the outcomes are shown in Tables 2–4. Table 2 presents
a comparison between the accuracies and RMSE of the predictive models, incorporating
the statistical approaches, while Table 3 represents a determination coefficient with a high
Atmosphere 2024, 15, 691 11 of 22

Atmosphere 2024, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 23

value on LSTM to all experiments across the stations. The MAE of our proposed system is
compared with the aforementioned models, and the comparison is shown in Table 4.

Figure 5.
Figure Illustrationof
5. Illustration of LSTM
LSTM model
model loss
loss against
against training
trainingand
andvalidated
validateddatasets
datasetsat
atthe
the(a)
(a) Kigali,
Kigali,
(b) Kamembe,
(b) Kamembe, (c) Gisenyi, and (d) Ruhengeri Aero stations, respectively.
respectively.

Table 2. Model evaluation comparing LSTM, GRU, and CNN by RMSE on the testing dataset; this
Table 2. Model evaluation comparing LSTM, GRU, and CNN by RMSE on the testing dataset; this
table proposes
table proposes the
the best
best performing
performing model
model based
based on
on RMSE.
RMSE.

Model/Station Kigali
Model/Station Kigali Aero
Aero Kamembe
KamembeAeroAeroGisenyi
Gisenyi Aero Ruhengeri
Aero RuhengeriAero
Aero Avg
Avg
LSTM
LSTM 0.003
0.003 0.008
0.008 0.007
0.007 0.004
0.004 0.005
0.005
GRU
GRU 0.008
0.008 0.010
0.010 0.011
0.011 0.007
0.007 0.009
0.009
CNN
CNN 0.007
0.007 0.007
0.007 0.009
0.009 0.006
0.006 0.007
0.007

Table 3. Testing dataset model evaluation comparing LSTM, GRU, and CNN by R2; this table pro-
Table 3. Testing dataset model evaluation comparing LSTM, GRU, and CNN by R2 ; this table
poses the best performing model based on R2. 2
proposes the best performing model based on R .
Model/Station Kigali Aero Kamembe Aero Gisenyi Aero Ruhengeri Aero
Model/Station Kigali Aero Kamembe Aero Gisenyi Aero Ruhengeri Aero
LSTM 0.997 0.998 0.997 0.998
LSTM
GRU 0.997
0.970 0.998
0.985 0.997
0.959 0.998
0.986
GRU
CNN 0.970
0.983 0.985
0.989 0.959
0.996 0.986
0.997
CNN 0.983 0.989 0.996 0.997
Table 4. Testing dataset model evaluation comparing LSTM, GRU, and CNN by MAE; this table
proposes the best performing model based on MAE.

Model/Station Kigali Aero Kamembe Aero Gisenyi Aero Ruhengeri Aero

LSTM 0.003 0.004 0.009 0.004
GRU 0.005 0.006 0.005 0.006
CNN 0.004 0.008 0.007 0.007
Atmosphere 2024, 15, 691 12 of 22

Table 4. Testing dataset model evaluation comparing LSTM, GRU, and CNN by MAE; this table
proposes the best performing model based on MAE.

Model/Station Kigali Aero Kamembe Aero Gisenyi Aero Ruhengeri Aero

LSTM 0.003 0.004 0.009 0.004
GRU 0.005 0.006 0.005 0.006
CNN 0.004 0.008 0.007 0.007

During the testing and validation phase, the difference between the anticipated and
actual outputs were minimized using backpropagation, hence reducing the error values.
The error value represents the discrepancy between the actual and predicted values. Errors
decreased gradually and stability was attained. The gradient continues throughout the
suggested model, resulting in minimum losses. Losses were plotted against the number of
epochs, showing a gradual decrease to about 0.005 at four epochs from around 0.008 at one
epoch. The difference is in a continuously decreasing trend, demonstrating the suitability
of the proposed model (Figure 5a–d).

4.3. LSTM Model Performance over Four Synoptic Stations

The RMSE of our proposed system is compared with the three different models (LSTM,
GRU, and CNN), and the results are shown in Table 2. The RMSE values obtained for
the LSTM, GRU, and CNN methods are 0.003, 0.008, and 0.007 at Kigali, 0.008, 0.010,
and 0.007 at Kamembe, 0.007, 0.011, and 0.009 at Gisenyi, and 0.004, 0.007, and 0.006
at Ruhengeri Aero station, where Ruhengeri and Kigali have the lowest RMSE values
across all models. Additionally, the LSTM model outperforms other models for all stations,
showing a high R2 of 0.998 at Kamembe and Ruhengeri stations, as shown in Table 3, and
the lowest MAE values of 0.003, 0.004, and 0.004 for Kigali, Kamembe, and Ruhengeri Aero
stations, as shown in Table 4. Based on the above results, the LSTM model outperformed
the other models across the four stations (Kigali, Kamembe, Gisenyi, and Ruhengeri).
The CNN and GRU model test results and prediction performances can be found in
Appendix A Figure A1a–d, Figure A2a–d, Figures A3a–d and A4a–d respectively.
Through running the pairwise t-tests, we compared the performance of the LSTM,
GRU, and CNN models based on metrics such as the MAE, R2 , and RMSE. The results con-
sistently showed that LSTM outperformed both the GRU and CNN across all metrics, with
significant t-statistic values and low p-values. Table 5 indicates the statistical significance
of the model. These findings support LSTM as the preferred model for rainfall prediction
tasks due to its accuracy and effectiveness in precise forecasting applications.

Table 5. Comparing t-tests and p-values across various metrics between the LSTM model and other
models, highlighting the efficacy of model’s statistical significance.

Model LSTM vs. CNN LSTM vs. GRU

Metrics RMSE MAE R2 RMSE MAE R2
p value 1.43 × 10−272 2.80 × 10−275 3.83 × 10−247 2.08 × 10−274 2.80 × 10−275 1.92 × 10−256
−4,891,431,684, −6,917,529,027, 189,151,184, −6,187,226,056, 6,917,529,027, 621,496,748,
t test
499,790.00 641,070.00 349,557.00 853,390.00 641,070.00 577,125.00

To compute the outlier index, we divided the number of outliers by the total number
of samples. This is a metric that quantifies the frequency of outliers in a dataset; the formula
is expressed as:
Number o f Outliers
Outlier Index = (11)
Total number o f samples
This method gives us a useful insight into the distribution of the data and possible
anomalies by expressing the relative frequency of outliers within the sample as a standard-
Atmosphere 2024, 15, 691 13 of 22

ized metric. Considering the outlier detection analysis conducted across the Kamembe
Atmosphere 2024, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 14 of 23
Aero, Kigali Aero, Gisenyi Aero, and Ruhengeri Aero stations revealed outlier proportion
indices of 0.07,0.17, 0.09, and 0.09, respectively (Figure 6).

Figure 6. Outlier distribution across stations covered by the study.

Figure 6. Outlier distribution across stations covered by the study.
These outlier proportion indices, along with the evaluation of model performance
metrics including RMSE, MAE, and R2 , suggest that the prediction accuracy of the CNN and
GRU models is impacted by the existence of outliers. Specifically, these outliers represent
unconventional precipitation cases that deviate significantly from typical patterns. In
contrast, the LSTM model showcased outstanding performance across all stations, even for
stations with a high outlier proportion (Figure 7a,d).
Based on the method and data used, the findings demonstrate that the suggested
methodology can predict average rainfall with high accuracy. The amount of average
rainfall predicted by the suggested model is shown by the red line, while the actual amount
measured by the rain gauge is represented by the blue line (Figure 7). The suggested model
can therefore be used to forecast the amount of rain that will fall on a given day. The x- and
y-axes represent the day and daily rainfall values, respectively, for the stations.
Over the training period, a decline in the learning rate is anticipated. We used the
Adam optimizer to minimize the loss function during the training of neural networks.
During this process, all models underwent training to fit a nonlinear dynamical model
100 times, and the loss function that we used is the mean squared error. The suggested
model improves the findings in several ways by utilizing sigmoid and tanh, which are
the endemic activation functions of neural networks. This section covers all the model
performance results, comparisons, and validations of the recommended predictions. As the
RMSE is used as a model performance, the computed RMSE is therefore plotted against the
number of epochs for the intensified LSTM model. It is evident that the RMSE decreases to
a minimum of 0.002 in the fourth epoch, but the network was further trained to achieve a
good accuracy, learning rate, and loss minimization. At the last epoch, we obtained the
RMSE as 0.005, with a loss validation of about 0.003 against epochs training at Kigali Aero
and all other stations that have shown a promising result in predicting the rainfall event,
and it fluctuates at around the same value for further epochs.

Figure 7. LSTM model performance with the testing dataset for rainfall (mm) prediction at different
stations, namely (a) Kigali Aero, (b) Kamembe Aero station, (c) Gisenyi Aero station, and (d)
Ruhengeri Aero station, with best performance.
Atmosphere 2024, 15, 691 14 of 22
Figure 6. Outlier distribution across stations covered by the study.

LSTMmodel
Figure7.7.LSTM
Figure model performance
performance with
with thethe testing
testing dataset
dataset for rainfall
for rainfall (mm)(mm) prediction
prediction at dif-
at different
stations, namelynamely
ferent stations, (a) Kigali Aero, Aero,
(a) Kigali (b) Kamembe Aero Aero
(b) Kamembe station, (c) Gisenyi
station, AeroAero
(c) Gisenyi station, and and
station, (d)
Ruhengeri Aero
(d) Ruhengeri station,
Aero withwith
station, bestbest
performance.
performance.

The results shown in this study highlight the extended opportunities afforded by the
previously mentioned methods, which have recently emerged as crucial components of
atmospheric science owing to their research potential and applications. The undeniable ap-
plicability of these methods in model prognosis suggests that machine learning techniques
can effectively address a range of issues in meteorology and synoptic climatology. These
include analyzing and identifying current circulation patterns, flooding, dynamic systems,
solar radiation, wind, and other weather-related patterns.

5. Discussion
In our study, a Python library named “keras” was used to train the LSTM model on
top of the Tensorflow backend. This procedure helped build, design, train, and deploy
a neural network. The experiment showed statistically significant differences between
the results of the methods used. When cross-validation was performed using “keras”,
the results of the experiments were presented through a predictive algorithm. Prior to
training, hyper parameter tuning is a crucial procedure, as hyper parameters such as
the number of hidden layers, learning rate, number of hidden nodes in each layer, and
dropout rate can significantly impact the model’s performance. Keras allows for the
random selection of values from a range of hyper parametric numerical values [77]. Keras
shows the number of epochs, which defines how many times the entire training dataset
is processed during training, while other libraries may have default values for hyper-
parameters leading to variations in model performance. Integrating with TensorFlow’s
backend ensured scalability and performance; this makes it easier and more beneficial in
experiments. It also provides high-level abstractions for building complex neural network
architectures [78].
Atmosphere 2024, 15, 691 15 of 22

LSTM model outstrips other ML models (CNN and GRU) and enhances the accuracy
of rainfall estimates in Rwanda (Figure 7) for a given day and over the next 100 days.
This improvement in forecasting will help to mitigate climate-induced rainfall hazards in
the country. As the best-performing model for the Rwanda’s rainfall forecast, the LSTM
demonstrates a strong relationship between the observed and predicted data, building
confidence in daily rainfall predictions. In rainfall forecasts, the LSTM, GRU, and CNN
models offer distinct advantages. The GRU’s computational efficiency is notable, but it
struggles with long-term dependencies [50]. Conversely, CNNs excel in spatial pattern
recognition but lack the ability to capture complex temporal relationships critical for rainfall
forecasting [51]. This study identifies LSTM as the optimal choice for rainfall prediction due
to its ability to handle long-term dependencies, adapt to data time series, and accurately
represent rainfall patterns, water resource, biodiversity, and natural conservation. Lately,
the LSTM model has been used more in Africa’s agroecosystem management [79]. Being
an agriculture-dependent country, Rwanda’s food and water security largely relies on
the climatic conditions; many farmers uses rainfall-derived water sources for crop and
livestock production [80]. Any deviations in the natural rainfall patterns in the country
could significantly impact the marginal farming community, causing famine and poverty.
Hence, the LSTM model has been found to enhance Rwanda’s preparedness ability for
catastrophic events such as unpredicted rainfall, floods, and erosions and aid in nature
preservation. Lately, climate change has also led to observable impacts, including both
increased and decreased water levels in lakes and rivers, causing a loss of biodiversity in
Rwanda [81].
Changes in climate have significantly reduced the country’s agricultural productivity,
adversely affecting crops and exacerbating issues related to food security, public health,
and livelihood nationwide [82]. Although the Government of Rwanda has implemented
important measures [83], such as promoting climate-smart farming methods to increase
resistance, drought-tolerant plants, sustainable land management strategies, and agro-
forestry systems, as well as strategic planning to reduce GHG emissions through various
platforms and improved agriculture systems [82], challenges remain due to insufficient
studies on improved mathematical modeling. Our approach of using machine learning
algorithms such as LSTM for rainfall forecasting in Rwanda has significantly improved
the predicting capabilities, accuracy, and the early warning system (EWS), providing infor-
mation for natural disaster management. The ML techniques used by various scholars on
the EWS often characterize the environmental conditions through better prediction and
attributions of extreme rainfall and other events [84,85]. For instance, in places like Orissa
and Kerala, where heavy rainfall can lead to property destruction and potential flooding,
accurate rainfall prediction was a crucial concern for industries, the government, and risk
management entities that required knowledge of the atmospheric conditions and predictive
schemes to forecast future events [86]. The study in India highlighted the usefulness of
mathematical approaches for rainfall prediction as a fundamental concern. However, the
implementation of artificial neural networks (ANNs) brought a significant shift in decision
making by emphasizing the better preparedness for disastrous events [77]. For example,
the use of an ML algorithm successfully managed the impact of a flash flood in a small
mountainous catchment, Anhe, in southwest of the Jiangxi province of China [87].
The model’s performance in our study shows implications for better preparedness
and planning during natural disasters such as floods in Rwanda. The LSTM model has
gained strong momentum in Rwanda’s rainfall forecasting as it introduces a data-driven
approach based on a deep neural network. The deep neural network was meticulously built
and evaluated to forecast rainfall events at four synoptic stations: Kigali Aero, Kamembe
Aero, Gisenyi Aero, and Ruhengeri Aero. The data normalization technique we adopted
in the deep neural network significantly improved prediction accuracy [88]. Hence, the
LSTM model was proven to be a dependable rainfall forecasting tool by learning long-
term dependencies between successive data series [73]. The nonlinearity and temporal
dependency of rainfall data make the LSTM model suitable for learning in a complex
Atmosphere 2024, 15, 691 16 of 22

modeling and dynamic environment. For instance, this model (ML algorithms) was applied
for predicting daily rainfall events in Senegal, where several meteorological parameters,
including the relative humidity, rainfall, and maximum and minimum temperatures were
successfully predicted using LSTM [63]. This model has also been extensively applied
in flood and drought predictions in Anhe, southwest of the Jiangxi province of China,
where the model was found to be useful for better planning and preparedness for natural
disasters. For Rwanda, although the LSTM model’s robustness is confirmed for the rainfall
forecast, we are aware of the intricate nature of the climate system and the existence of
nonlinear correlations between meteorological factors and rainfall patterns in East Africa.
The LSTM model captures the hydro-metrological complexity and temporal sequential
data, but the diversity of the terrains and microclimatic conditions in Rwanda often limits
its ability to accurately represent the climate system relationships within the country.
For instance, the steep and rocky terrains of western Rwanda experience notable rainfall
events that usually cause significant erosion, mudslides, and landslides [89]. The spatial
heterogeneity of rainfall over Rwanda, which increasing heavily from eastern low-lands
to western highlands [90], further intensifies extremities of flooding and landslides [15].
These events damage societal well-being and foster an environment prone to pests and
diseases [91]. Improved and high-resolution datasets are needed for better prediction
models in the future.

6. Conclusions
This study has explored the effectiveness of utilizing the LSTM, CNN, and GRU
machine learning algorithms for predicting rainfall patterns. Through extensive experi-
mentation and analysis, this study has demonstrated that the algorithms used here would
offer promising results in accurately forecasting rainfall events in Rwanda. The LSTM
has typically demonstrated the ability to capture temporal and long-term dependencies,
proven to be effective in modeling the dynamic nature of rainfall patterns, and outper-
forms other models, such as the CNN and GRU, showing strengths in handling spatial
and temporal features and contributing to an accurate prediction ability. In contrast, the
CNN and GRU require additional preprocessing (feature engineering) to handle time-series
data adequately.
In addition, this paper highlights the significance of preprocessing methods, data
availability, and quality in maximizing machine learning model performance. The pre-
dictive power of the LSTM, CNN, and GRU models is greatly enhanced by utilizing a
variety of datasets and suitable feature engineering techniques. The LSTM model in rainfall
forecasting for Rwanda has advanced the prediction of the past rainfall trajectory accu-
rately. Its effectiveness is well-validated numerically. The comparisons were made using
traditionally available machine learning algorithms. Hence, the LSTM machine learning
technique marks a notable advancement for weather forecasting and disaster preparedness
in Rwanda. LSTM can predict rainfall occurrences more accurately across the country, al-
lowing decision makers to take proactive measures. However, an improved model accuracy
is essential in the future with the availability of high-resolution datasets. The most essential
components needed are high-resolution satellite data, soil moisture data, and land cover
data, as well as expertise in the validation and verification of these data when running
the models. Deploying and training the LSTM model across all stations in Rwanda can
make it prone to overfitting, especially when trained on a small dataset. The predicted
rainfall dataset can potentially aid in hydro-meteorological assessments, particularly in
identifying drought, which is a significant agricultural concern in Rwanda, as well as flash
floods within the river catchment areas.
Overall, the findings of this research highlight the potential of methodologies and the
effectiveness of machine learning algorithms used for forecasting rainfall events in Rwanda.
Comparing and evaluating deep learning models and ensuring accuracy and reliability in
predicting rainfall events in Rwanda using different weather parameters are significant.
By integrating cutting-edge methods such as LSTM into the current forecasting systems,
Atmosphere 2024, 15, 691 17 of 22

stakeholders in different sectors, including agriculture, water resource management, and

disaster preparedness, would greatly benefit in terms of decision making and mitigating
weather-related risks. Nevertheless, more research is needed to investigate other potential
model optimization avenues and to address issues like computational complexity and data
scarcity in the future.

Author Contributions: J.K. (James Kagabo) conceptualization, methodology, formal analysis,

writing—original draft; G.R.K. revision, supervision, visualization, J.K. (Jonah Kazora) concep-
tualization, methodology; C.N.S. review, software development and design; F.H. methodology. All
authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Atmosphere 2024, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 18 of 23
Data Availability Statement: All data used in this research are available, accessible freely upon
reasonable request.
Acknowledgments:We
Acknowledgments: Wewould
wouldlike
liketotoextend
extendourourgratitude
gratitudetotoRwanda
RwandaMeteorology
MeteorologyAgency
Agency(Meteo
(Meteo
Rwanda) for
Rwanda) for the
the provision
provisionof
ofdata.
data. James
James Kagabo
Kagabo would
would like
like to
tothank
thankthe
theGovernment
Governmentof ofRwanda
Rwanda
(GoR)and
(GoR) andthethe Peoples
Peoples Republic
Republic of China
of China throughthrough the Ministry
the Ministry of Financeof Finance
and Commerceand(MOFOCM)
Commerce
(MOFOCM) for providing a scholarship to pursue his M.Sc. in Atmospheric Sciences
for providing a scholarship to pursue his M.Sc. in Atmospheric Sciences at the Nanjing Universityat the Nanjing
University of Information Science and Technology (NUIST). Giri Raj
of Information Science and Technology (NUIST). Giri Raj Kattel would like to acknowledgeKattel would likethe
to
acknowledge the Longshan Professorship at NUIST. We also acknowledge
Longshan Professorship at NUIST. We also acknowledge the three anonymous reviewers who the three anonymous
reviewersinsightful
provided who provided insightful
comments comments
for this paper. for this paper.
Conflictsof
Conflicts ofInterest:
Interest: The
Theauthors
authorsdeclare
declareno
noconflicts
conflictsof
ofinterest.
interest.

AppendixA
Appendix A

Figure A1. Validation

FigureA1. Validation of
of CNN
CNN model
model for
for predicting
predictingrainfall
rainfallat
atsynoptic
synopticweather
weatherstations
stationsin
inRwanda.
Rwanda.
 Atmosphere 2024, 15, 691 18 of 22
Figure A1. Validation of CNN model for predicting rainfall at synoptic weather stations in Rwanda.

Atmosphere 2024, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 19 of 23

Figure
Figure A2. CNN model
A2. CNN model performance
performance with
with testing
testing dataset
dataset for
for rainfall
rainfall prediction
prediction at
at different
different station.
station.

Figure
Figure A3.A3.
GRUGRU modelperformance
model performance with
with testing
testingdataset
datasetforfor
rainfall prediction
rainfall at different
prediction stations.
at different stations.
 Atmosphere 2024, 15, 691 19 of 22
Figure A3. GRU model performance with testing dataset for rainfall prediction at different stations.

Figure
Figure A4.A4.
GRUGRU modelperformance
model performance with
withtesting
testingdataset
datasetforfor
rainfall prediction
rainfall at different
prediction stations.
at different stations.
References
Reference
1. Arnell, N.W.; Livermore, M.J.L.; Kovats, S.; Levy, P.E.; Nicholls, R.; Parry, M.L.; Gaffin, S.R. Climate and Socio-Economic Scenarios
1. Arnell,
forN.W.; Livermore,
Global-Scale M.J.L.;
Climate Kovats,
Change S.;Assessments:
Impacts Levy, P.E.; Nicholls, R.; Parry,
Characterising M.L.;
the SRES Gaffin, S.R.
Storylines. Glob.Climate
Environ. and Socio-Economic
Chang. 2004, 14, 3–20. Sce-
narios[CrossRef]
for Global-Scale Climate Change Impacts Assessments: Characterising the SRES Storylines. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2004,
Cazenave, A.; Le Cozannet, G. Sea Level Rise and Its Coastal Impacts. Earth Futur. 2014, 2, 15–34. [CrossRef]
2. 3–20.
14,
2. 3. Singh,
Cazenave, A.;R.M.;
Le Gupta, A. Water
Cozannet, Pollution-Sources,
G. Sea Level Rise andEffects and Control
Its Coastal Water
Impacts. Pollution-Sources,
Earth’s Futur. 2014, Effects and Control. Res. Gate 2017,
2, 15–34.
3. 5, 1–17.
Singh, R.M.; Gupta, A. Water Pollution-Sources, Effects and Control Water Pollution-Sources, Effects and Control. Res. Gate
4. Gahlawat, I.N.; Lakra, P. Global Climate Change and Its Effects. Integr. J. Soc. Sci. 2020, 7, 14–23.
2017, 5, 1–17.
5. Nkomo, J.C.; Nyong, A.O.; Kulindwa, K. The Impacts of Climate Change in Africa. In The Stern Review on the Economics of Climate
4. Gahlawat, I.N.; Lakra, P. Global Climate Change and Its Effects. Integr. J. Soc. Sci. 2020, 7, 14–23.
Change; LSE: London, UK, 2006; 51p.
6. IPCC. Summary for Policymakers: Synthesis Report. Climate Change. 2023 Synthesis Report; Contribution of Working Groups I, II III to
Sixth Assessment Reports; The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: Geneva, Switzerland, 2023; pp. 1–34.
7. Kattel, G.R. State of Future Water Regimes in the World’s River Basins: Balancing the Water between Society and Nature. Crit.
Rev. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2019, 49, 1107–1133. [CrossRef]
8. Adger, W.N.; Arnell, N.W.; Tompkins, E.L. Successful Adaptation to Climate Change across Scales. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2005, 15,
77–86. [CrossRef]
9. Godfray, H.C.J.; Beddington, J.R.; Crute, I.R.; Haddad, L.; Lawrence, D.; Muir, J.F.; Pretty, J.; Robinson, S.; Thomas, S.M.; Toulmin,
C. Food Security: The Challenge of Feeding 9 Billion People. Science 2010, 327, 812–818. [CrossRef]
10. Aryal, J.P.; Manchanda, N.; Sonobe, T. Expectations for Household Food Security in the Coming Decades: A Global Scenario. In
Future Foods; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2022; pp. 107–131.
11. Zhang, Z.; Kattel, G.R.; Shang, Y.; Wang, G.; Chuai, X.; Wang, Q.; Cui, X.; Miao, L. Steady Decline in Food Self-Sufficiency in
Africa from 1961 to 2018. Reg. Environ. Chang. 2023, 23, 79. [CrossRef]
12. Cohen, B. Urbanization in Developing Countries: Current Trends, Future Projections, and Key Challenges for Sustainability.
Technol. Soc. 2006, 28, 63–80. [CrossRef]
13. Hove, M.; Ngwerume, E.; Muchemwa, C. The Urban Crisis in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Threat to Human Security and Sustainable
Development. Stab. Int. J. Secur. Dev. 2013, 2, 7. [CrossRef]
14. Douglas, I.; Alam, K.; Maghenda, M.; Mcdonnell, Y.; McLean, L.; Campbell, J. Unjust Waters: Climate Change, Flooding and the
Urban Poor in Africa. Environ. Urban. 2008, 20, 187–205. [CrossRef]
15. Mikova, K. Effect of Climate Change on Crop Production in Rwanda. Earth Sci. 2015, 4, 120. [CrossRef]
16. Bakshi, B.; Nawrotzki, R.J.; Donato, J.R.; Lelis, L.S. Exploring the Link between Climate Variability and Mortality in Sub-Saharan
Africa. Int. J. Environ. Sustain. Dev. 2019, 18, 206–237. [CrossRef]
Atmosphere 2024, 15, 691 20 of 22

17. Nilsson, M.; Sie, A.; Muindi, K.; Bunker, A.; Ingole, V.; Ebi, K.L. Weather, Climate, and Climate Change Research to Protect
Human Health in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. Glob. Health Action 2021, 14 (Suppl. S1), 1984014. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
18. Opoku, S.K.; Filho, W.L.; Hubert, F.; Adejumo, O. Climate Change and Health Preparedness in Africa: Analysing Trends in Six
African Countries. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 4672. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
19. Safari, B. Trend Analysis of the Mean Annual Temperature in Rwanda during the Last Fifty Two Years. J. Environ. Prot. 2012, 3,
538–551. [CrossRef]
20. Ngarukiyimana, J.P.; Fu, Y.; Sindikubwabo, C.; Nkurunziza, I.F.; Ogou, F.K.; Vuguziga, F.; Ogwang, B.A.; Yang, Y. Climate Change
in Rwanda: The Observed Changes in Daily Maximum and Minimum Surface Air Temperatures during 1961–2014. Front. Earth
Sci. 2021, 9, 619512. [CrossRef]
21. Safari, B.; Sebaziga, J.N.; Siebert, A. Evaluation of CORDEX-CORE Regional Climate Models in Simulating Rainfall Variability in
Rwanda. Int. J. Climatol. 2022, 43, 1112–1140. [CrossRef]
22. Guo, Z.; Chen, S.S.; Kattel, G.R.; Mkumbo, A.C.; Xiong, C.; Gao, Q.; Shen, Q. Scenario Analysis of Phosphorus Flow in Food
Production and Consumption System in the Mwanza Region, Tanzania. Sci. Total Environ. 2023, 879, 162991. [CrossRef]
23. Mazo, J. Climate Conflict: How Global Warming Threatens Security and What to Do about It; Routledge: Oxfordshire, UK, 2010;
Volume 409.
24. Haggag, M.; Kalisa, J.C.; Abdeldayem, A.W. Projections of Precipitation, Air Temperature and Potential Evapotranspiration in
Rwanda under Changing Climate Conditions. Afr. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2016, 10, 18–33.
25. Trisos, C.H.; Adelekan, I.O.; Totin, E.; Ayanlade, A.; Efitre, J.; Gemeda, A.; Kalaba, K.; Lennard, C.; Masao, C.; Mgaya, Y.; et al.
Africa. In Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability; Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment
Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate, Change; Pörtner, H.-O., Roberts, D.C., Tignor, M., Poloczanska, E.S., Mintenb,
K., Eds.; IPCC: Geneva, Switzerland, 2022.
26. Austin, K.G.; Beach, R.H.; Lapidus, D.; Salem, M.E.; Taylor, N.J.; Knudsen, M.; Ujeneza, N. Impacts of Climate Change on the
Potential Productivity of Eleven Staple Crops in Rwanda. Sustainability 2020, 12, 4116. [CrossRef]
27. Ayugi, B.O.; Chung, E.-S.; Zhu, H.; Ogega, O.M.; Babousmail, H.; Ongoma, V. Projected Changes in Extreme Climate Events
over Africa under 1.5 ◦ C, 2.0 ◦ C and 3.0 ◦ C global Warming Levels Based on CMIP6 Projections. Atmos. Res. 2023, 292, 106872.
[CrossRef]
28. Gitz, V.; Meybeck, A.; Lipper, L.; Young, C.; Braatz, S. Climate Change and Food Security: Risks and Responses; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2016.
[CrossRef]
29. MIDMAR. Disaster Management Plan; Ministry of Disaster Management and Refugee Affairs(MIDMAR): Kigali, Rwanda, 2012.
30. Li, L.; Mind’je, R. Hydrogeological Hazard Susceptibility and Community Risk Perception in Rwanda: A Case Study of Floods and
Landslides; Springer: Singapore, 2023. [CrossRef]
31. Ngarukiyimana, J.P.; Fu, Y.; Yang, Y.; Ogwang, A. Dominant Atmospheric Circulation Patterns Associated with Abnormal Rainfall
Events over Rwanda, East Africa. Int. J. Cliamtology 2017, 38, 187–202. [CrossRef]
32. Trenberth, K.E. The Impact of Climate Change and Variability on Heavy Precipitation, Floods, and Droughts. Encycl. Hydrol. Sci.
2005, 17, 1–11.
33. Ziervogel, G.; Johnston, P.; Matthew, M.; Mukheibir, P. Using Climate Information for Supporting Climate Change Adaptation in
Water Resource Management in South Africa. Clim. Chang. 2010, 103, 537–554. [CrossRef]
34. Wagesho, N.; Claire, M. Analysis of Rainfall Intensity-Duration-Frequency Relationship for Rwanda. J. Water Resour. Prot. 2016,
8, 706. [CrossRef]
35. Wainwright, C.M.; Finney, D.L.; Kilavi, M.; Black, E.; Marsham, J.H. Extreme Rainfall in East Africa, October 2019–January 2020
and Context under Future Climate Change. Weather 2021, 76, 26–31. [CrossRef]
36. Nibagwire, N.C. Climate Change and Natural Disasters in Africa; Case Study of Rwanda. Master’s Thesis, Pan African University,
Yaoundé, Cameroun, 2016.
37. Perera, D.; Seidou, O.; Agnihotri, J.; Rasmy, M.; Smakhtin, V.; Coulibaly, P.; Mehmood, H. Flood Early Warning Systems: A Review of
Benefits, Challenges and Prospects; UNU-INWEH: Hamilton, ON, Canada, 2019.
38. Umer, Y.; Ettema, J.; Jetten, V.; Steeneveld, G.-J.; Ronda, R. Evaluation of the WRF Model to Simulate a High-Intensity Rainfall
Event over Kampala, Uganda. Water 2021, 13, 873. [CrossRef]
39. Hosseini, F.S.; Choubin, B.; Mosavi, A.; Nabipour, N.; Shamshirband, S.; Darabi, H.; Haghighi, A.T. Flash-Flood Hazard
Assessment Using Ensembles and Bayesian-Based Machine Learning Models: Application of the Simulated Annealing Feature
Selection Method. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 711, 135161. [CrossRef]
40. Bochenek, B.; Ustrnul, Z. Machine Learning in Weather Prediction and Climate Analyses—Applications and Perspectives.
Atmosphere 2022, 13, 180. [CrossRef]
41. Mohammed, M.; Khan, M.B.; Bashie, E.B.M. Machine Learning: Algorithms and Applications; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2016.
[CrossRef]
42. Sankalp, S.; Rao, U.M.; Patra, K.C.; Sahoo, S.N. Modeling Gated Recurrent Unit (GRU) Neural Network in Forecasting Surface
Soil Wetness for Drought Districts of Odisha. In Modeling and Mitigation Measures for Managing Extreme Hydrometeorological Events
Under a Warming Climate; Kasiviswanathan, K.S., Soundharajan, B., Patidar, S., He, J., Ojha, C.S.P., Eds.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The
Netherlands, 2023; Volume 14, pp. 217–229. [CrossRef]
Atmosphere 2024, 15, 691 21 of 22

43. Endalie, D.; Haile, G.; Taye, W. Deep Learning Model for Daily Rainfall Prediction: Case Study of Jimma, Ethiopia. Water Supply
2022, 22, 3448–3461. [CrossRef]
44. Aderyani, F.R.; Jamshid Mousavi, S.; Jafari, F. Short-Term Rainfall Forecasting Using Machine Learning-Based Approaches of
PSO-SVR, LSTM and CNN. J. Hydrol. 2022, 614, 128463. [CrossRef]
45. Dotse, S.Q. Deep Learning–Based Long Short-Term Memory Recurrent Neural Networks for Monthly Rainfall Forecasting in
Ghana, West Africa. Theor. Appl. Climatol. 2023, 155, 0123456789. [CrossRef]
46. Bai, Z.; Liu, Q.; Liu, Y. Groundwater Potential Mapping in Hubei Region of China Using Machine Learning, Ensemble Learning,
Deep Learning and Automl Methods. Nat. Resour. Res. 2022, 31, 2549–2569. [CrossRef]
47. Dtissibe, F.Y.; Ari, A.A.A.; Abboubakar, H.; Njoya, A.N.; Mohamadou, A.; Thiare, O. A Comparative Study of Machine Learning
and Deep Learning Methods for Flood Forecasting in the Far-North Region, Cameroon. Sci. Afr. 2024, 23, e02053. [CrossRef]
48. Oshodi, I. Machine Learning-Based Algorithms for Weather Forecasting. Int. J. Artif. Intell. Mach. Learn. 2022, 2, 12–20. [CrossRef]
49. Hochreiter, S. The Vanishing Gradient Problem during Learning Recurrent Neural Nets and Problem Solutions. Int. J. Uncertain.
Fuzziness Knowl. Based Syst. 1998, 6, 107–116. [CrossRef]
50. Lechner, M.; Hasani, R. Learning Long-Term Dependencies in Irregularly-Sampled Time Series. arXiv 2020, arXiv:2006.04418.
51. Puthran, R. Spatio-Temporal Analysis of Hybrid CNN-GRU Model for Prediction of Earthquake for Disaster Management. Int. J.
Intell. Syst. Appl. Eng. 2024, 12, 270–281.
52. Adhikari, U.; Pouyan Nejadhashemi, A.; Herman, M.R. A Review of Climate Change Impacts on Water Resources in East Africa.
Trans. ASABE 2015, 58, 1493–1507. [CrossRef]
53. Persello, C.; Wegner, J.D.; Hänsch, R.; Tuia, D.; Ghamisi, P.; Koeva, M.; Camps-Valls, G. Deep learning and earth observation to
support the sustainable development goals: Current approaches, open challenges, and future opportunities. IEEE Geosci. Remote
Sens. Mag. 2022, 10, 172–200. [CrossRef]
54. GoR Green Growth and Climate Resilience; Republic of Rwanda: Kigali, Rwanda, 2011; 100p.
55. Kazora, J.; Zhu, W.; Kyaw, T.O.; Sebaziga, J.N.; Rusanganwa, F.; Kagabo, J. Enhancement of East African Monsoon Long Rainfall
(March to May) Variability from Weekly to Annual Scale by Climatic Extremes. Atmos. Clim. Sci. 2023, 13, 491–506. [CrossRef]
56. Akayezu, P.; van Duren, I.C.; Groen, T.A.; Grueter, C.C.; Robbins, M.M. Abundance and Spatial Distribution of the Main Food
Species for Mountain Gorillas in the Virunga Massif, Rwanda. Biodivers. Conserv. 2019, 28, 3597–3620. [CrossRef]
57. Kelemen, M.; Virgala, I.; Kelemenová, T.; Mikova, L.; Frankovský, P.; Lipták, T.; Lörinc, M. Distance Measurement via Using of
Ultrasonic Sensor. J. Autom. Control 2015, 3, 71–74.
58. Funk, C.; Peterson, P.; Landsfeld, M.; Pedreros, D.; Verdin, J.; Shukla, S.; Husak, G.; Rowland, J.; Harrison, L.; Hoell, A.; et al. The
Climate Hazards Infrared Precipitation with Stations—A New Environmental Record for Monitoring Extremes. Sci. Data 2015,
2, 150066. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
59. Muhire, I.; Ahmed, F.; Elbasit, A. Spatio-Temporal Variations of Rainfall Erosivity in Rwanda. J. Soil Sci. Environ. Manag. 2015, 6,
72–83.
60. Ayugi, B.; Tan, G.; Ullah, W.; Boiyo, R.; Ongoma, V. Inter-comparison of remotely sensed precipitation datasets over Kenya during
1998–2016. Atmos. Res. 2019, 225, 96–109. [CrossRef]
61. Blum, A.G.; Zaitchik, B.; Alexander, S.; Wu, S.; Zhang, Y.; Shukla, S.; Alemneh, T.; Block, P. A Grand Prediction: Communicating
and Evaluating 2018 Summertime Upper Blue Nile Rainfall and Streamflow Forecasts in Preparation for Ethiopia’s New Dam.
Front. Water 2019, 1, 3. [CrossRef]
62. Jonah, K.; Wen, W.; Shahid, S.; Ali, M.A.; Bilal, M.; Habtemicheal, B.A.; Iyakaremye, V.; Qiu, Z.; Almazroui, M.; Wang, Y.; et al.
Spatiotemporal variability of rainfall trends and influencing factors in Rwanda. J. Atmos. Sol. Terr. Phys. 2021, 219, 105631.
[CrossRef]
63. Nyasulu, C.; Diattara, A.; Traore, A.; Deme, A.; Ba, C. Towards Resilient Agriculture to Hostile Climate Change in the Sahel
Region: A Case Study of Machine Learning-Based Weather Prediction in Senegal. Agriculture 2022, 12, 1473. [CrossRef]
64. Tang, L.; Gao, W.; Xue, L.; Zhang, G.; Guo, J. Climatological Characteristics of Hydrometeors in Precipitating Clouds over
Eastern China and Their Relationship with Precipitation Based on ERA5 Reanalysis. J. Appl. Meteorol. Climatol. 2023, 62, 625–641.
[CrossRef]
65. Davey, R. Scientists Report a Novel Method for Detecting Ice on Wind Turbines; AZoM: Manchester, UK, 2022.
66. Cho, K.; Van Merriënboer, B.; Gulcehre, C.; Bahdanau, D.; Bougares, F.; Schwenk, H.; Bengio, Y. Learning Phrase Representations
Using RNN Encoder-Decoder for Statistical Machine Translation. arXiv 2014, arXiv:1406.1078.
67. Santurkar, S.; Tsipras, D.; Ilyas, A.; Madry, A. How Does Batch Normalization Help Optimization? In Proceedings of the Advances
in Neural Information Processing Systems 31: Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems 2018, NeurIPS 2018,
Montreal, QC, Canada, 3–8 December 2018.
68. Schilling, F. The Effect of Batch Normalization on Deep Convolutional Neural Networks. Master’s Thesis, KTH Royal Institute of
Technology, Stockholm, Sweden, 2016.
69. Javid, A.M.; Das, S.; Skoglund, M.; Chatterjee, S. A Relu Dense Layer to Improve the Performance of Neural Networks. In ICASSP
2021–2021 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP); IEEE: New York, NY, USA, 2021;
pp. 2810–2814.
70. Srivastava, N.; Hinton, G.; Krizhevsky, A.; Sutskever, I.; Salakhutdinov, R. Dropout: A Simple Way to Prevent Neural Networks
from Overfitting. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2014, 15, 1929–1958.
Atmosphere 2024, 15, 691 22 of 22

71. Kim, T.; Kim, H.Y. Forecasting Stock Prices with a Feature Fusion LSTM-CNN Model Using Different Representations of the
Same Data. PLoS ONE 2019, 14, e0212320. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
72. Bellec, G.; Scherr, F.; Hajek, E.; Salaj, D.; Legenstein, R.; Maass, W. Biologically Inspired Alternatives to Backpropagation through
Time for Learning in Recurrent Neural Nets. arXiv 2019, arXiv:1901.09049.
73. Abed, M.; Imteaz, M.A.; Ahmed, A.N.; Huang, Y.F. Application of Long Short-Term Memory Neural Network Technique for
Predicting Monthly Pan Evaporation. Sci. Rep. 2021, 11, 20742. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
74. Yu, Y.; Si, X.; Hu, C.; Zhang, J. A Review of Recurrent Neural Networks: LSTM Cells and Network Architectures. Neural Comput.
2019, 31, 1235–1270. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
75. Hu, H.; Ayyub, B.M. Machine Learning for Projecting Extreme Precipitation Intensity for Short Durations in a Changing Climate.
Geosciences 2019, 9, 209. [CrossRef]
76. Bangdiwala, S.I. Regression: Simple Linear. Int. J. Inj. Contr. Saf. Promot. 2018, 25, 113–115. [CrossRef]
77. Poornima, S.; Pushpalatha, M. Prediction of Rainfall Using Intensified LSTM Based Recurrent Neural Network with Weighted
Linear Units. Atmosphere 2019, 10, 668. [CrossRef]
78. Vasilev, I.; Slater, D.; Spacagna, G.; Roelants, P.; Zocca, V. Python Deep Learning: Exploring Deep Learning Techniques and Neural
Network Architectures with Pytorch, Keras, and TensorFlow; Packt Publishing Ltd.: Birmingham, UK, 2019.
79. Houmma, I.H.; El Mansouri, L.; Gadal, S.; Garba, M.; Hadria, R. Modelling Agricultural Drought: A Review of Latest Advances
in Big Data Technologies. Geomat. Nat. Hazards Risk 2022, 13, 2737–2776. [CrossRef]
80. Bezu, S.; Demissie, T.; Abebaw, D.; Mungai, C.; Samuel, S.; Radeny, M.A.O.; Huyer, S.; Solomon, D. Climate Change, Agriculture
and International Migration Nexus: African Youth Perspective; CCAFS Working Paper; CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change,
Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS): Wageningen, The Netherlands, 2020.
81. Mukanyandwi, V.; Nahayo, L.; Hakorimana, E.; Gasirabo, A.; Otgon, S. Review on Water Resources Management and Key Threats
in Rwanda, East Africa. J. Water Secur. 2018, 4, jws2018003. [CrossRef]
82. Mutabazi, A. Assessment of Operational Framework Related to Climate Change in Rwanda; Rwanda Environment Management
Authority: Kigali, Rwanda, 2010; 41p.
83. Taremwa, N.K.; Gashumba, D.; Butera, A.; Ranganathan, T. Climate Change Adaptation in Rwanda through Indigenous
Knowledge Practice. J. Soc. Sci. 2016, 46, 165–175. [CrossRef]
84. Mohammed, M.; Kolapalli, R.; Golla, N.; Maturi, S.S. Prediction of Rainfall Using Machine Learning Techniques. Int. J. Sci.
Technol. Res. 2020, 9, 3236–3240.
85. Frame, J.M.; Kratzert, F.; Klotz, D.; Gauch, M.; Shalev, G.; Gilon, O.; Qualls, L.M.; Gupta, H.V.; Nearing, G.S. Deep Learning
Rainfall–Runoff Predictions of Extreme Events. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 2022, 26, 3377–3392. [CrossRef]
86. Mall, R.K.; Kumar, R.; Bhatla, R. Climate Change and Disaster in India. J. South Asian Disaster Stud. 2011, 4, 27–76.
87. Wu, J.; Liu, H.; Wei, G.; Song, T.; Zhang, C.; Zhou, H. Flash Flood Forecasting Using Support Vector Regression Model in a Small
Mountainous Catchment. Water 2019, 11, 1327. [CrossRef]
88. Zintgraf, L.M.; Cohen, T.S.; Adel, T.; Welling, M. Visualizing Deep Neural Network Decisions: Prediction Difference Analysis.
arXiv 2017, arXiv:1702.04595.
89. Hafashimana, N. Modelling the Effects of Land Use/Cover Change and Rainfall Variability on Landslide Hazards: The Case of
Nyabihu District, Rwanda. Master’s Dissertation, University of Botswana, Gaborone, Botswana, 2020.
90. Nkurunziza, I.; Guirong, T.; Ngarukiyimana, J.P.; Sindikubwabo, C. Influence of the Mascarene High on October-December
Rainfall and Their Associated Atmospheric Circulation Anomalies over Rwanda. J. Environ. Agric. Sci. 2019, 20, 1–20.
91. Patz, J.A.; Grabow, M.L.; Limaye, V.S. When It Rains, It Pours: Future Climate Extremes and Health. Ann. Glob. Health 2014, 80,
332–344. [CrossRef]
Saaida, M. (2023). Overcoming cultural differences for community reconciliation in Rwanda. International Journal of
Multidisciplinary Research and Development, 10(3), 1–10.

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

View publication stats