GRU and XGBoost Performance with Hyperparameter Tuning Using GridSearchCV and Bayesian Optimization on an IoT-Based Weather Prediction System

Hendri Darmawan, Mike Yuliana, Moch. Zen Samsono Hadi

International Journal on Advanced Science Engineering and Information Technology · 07 June 2023

In one sentence. GRU and XGBoost, tuned and deployed on an IoT weather station, forecast local sensor readings and four-day rain; XGBoost wins regression, GRU wins classification.

Abstract

Weather is essential to human life, but it is difficult to forecast due to its diverse nature. We evaluated and compared the accuracy of two machine learning algorithms, GRU and XGBoost, in predicting weather patterns. We used GridSearchCV to tune the hyperparameters for the GRU algorithm and Bayesian optimization for the XGBoost algorithm. We used regression to predict weather sensor data and classification to predict rainfall in the following four days. We then deployed the best-performing model to the cloud server and connected it to the local IoT device with weather sensors in Sedati, Sidoarjo Regency, Indonesia. We conducted tests using data from the BMKG Juanda Sidoarjo and data from the local IoT device. The findings indicated that the XGBoost regression model outperformed the GRU model in the first stage, with an average RMSE of 1.2728125. In comparison, the average RMSE for GRU regression was 1.551666667. In the second stage, however, GRU regression performed better, with an average RMSE of 2.23, while the XGBoost regression had 2.28. In the classification tests, the GRU model had a higher F1 score of 0.88 in the first stage, while the XGBoost classification was 0.86. Both models had the same accuracy of 0.75 when tested with IoT data. However, the GRU classification model was better since it considered the context of the prediction, resulting in a lower likelihood of rain when it was not raining.

Labels

Labels and summary are generated by Claude and reviewed weekly. Wrong? Edit this entry.