Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
203,203 studies31 sourcesUpdated 50 min ago
Peer-reviewedCC BYHydrology

GRACE Downscaling and Machine Learning Models for Groundwater Prediction: A Systematic Review

  1. 1Department of Civil and Architectural Engineering, Sultan Qaboos University, Muscat 123, Oman

Abstract

Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) satellites primarily monitor changes in land water storage, including groundwater, soil moisture, lake and river surface water, and canopy and snow water. However, its coarse spatial resolution of 0.25 degrees limits its ability to observe smaller basins. To assess aquifer depletion and evaluate a long-term water resource management framework, GRACE data are crucial. It remains rare for GRACE-focused studies to be conducted in great depth. A comprehensive review of 80 articles published between 2011 and 2025 was conducted using the Scopus and Web of Science databases. These articles focused on downscaling GRACE data using machine learning (ML) methods. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) reporting guidelines were used in this review. This study highlights the attributes of ML models, the input variables used, the evaluation metrics, and the output resolution. Based on the analysis of the articles, random forest (RF) methods were used in the majority of the papers. Gradient boosting (GB), artificial neural networks (ANN), support vector machines (SVM), support vector regression (SVR), and long short-term memory (LSTM) were the most widely used ML methods. As input variables, rainfall (Pr), soil moisture (SM), and runoff (Qs) are essential. In 2011, there were very few journal articles; since 2021, the number has increased. The number of published studies from China was the highest (24), followed by the USA (12) and Iran (9). A total of 38 journals published reviewed articles. In terms of articles, Remote Sensing generates 19%, Journal of Hydrology has 10%, and Journal of Hydrology: Regional Studies has 8%. The paper also discusses limitations, challenges, recommendations, and potential future directions for improving the accuracy of the GWS change prediction model.

Related

  1. Defining and predicting groundwater drought dynamics in a temperate maritime region using Standardised Groundwater Index (SGI) and ensemble machine learning
    Tarig Mohamed, Ahmed Nasr, Paul Hynds
    Ecological InformaticsPeer-reviewedCC BYFull textClimate scienceDOAJ
  2. A National Scale Hybrid Machine Learning Model for Enhanced Groundwater Depth Estimation
    Jun Liu, Raphael J. M. Schneider, Lars Troldborg +3
    Water Resources ResearchPeer-reviewedCC BYFull textEnvironmental science & pollutionDOAJ
  3. Groundwater potential mapping using conventional and machine learning approaches with multi-indicator validation of Aflaj systems in Oman
    Saif Al Aamri, Sameh Kantoush, Mahmood Al Mamari +3
    Journal of Hydrology: Regional StudiesPeer-reviewedCC BYFull textEnvironmental science & pollutionDOAJ
  4. Spatial distribution, origins, and driving mechanisms of groundwater nitrate contamination in a rural-agricultural-mining catchment: Insight from PMF, machine learning and multi-isotopic techniques
    Houyun Sun, Feng Ma, Xiaofeng Wei +2
    Journal of Hydrology: Regional StudiesPeer-reviewedCC BYFull textGeology & geochemistryDOAJ
  5. Machine-learning projections of groundwater storage under climate, land-use, and human-driven changes in Madhesh Province, Nepal
    Anjana Kumari Mahto, Vishan Dahal, Ram Krishna Regmi +4
    Scientific ReportsPeer-reviewedCC BYFull textOceanography & cryosphereDOAJ
BibTeX
@article{nadabi2026grace,
  title = {{GRACE Downscaling and Machine Learning Models for Groundwater Prediction: A Systematic Review}},
  author = {Mohammed S. Al Nadabi and Mohammed El-Diasty and Talal Etri and Mohammad Reza Nikoo},
  journal = {Hydrology},
  year = {2026},
  month = may,
  doi = {10.3390/hydrology13050135},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.3390/hydrology13050135},
  note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY  - JOUR
TI  - GRACE Downscaling and Machine Learning Models for Groundwater Prediction: A Systematic Review
AU  - Mohammed S. Al Nadabi
AU  - Mohammed El-Diasty
AU  - Talal Etri
AU  - Mohammad Reza Nikoo
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/05/14
JO  - Hydrology
DO  - 10.3390/hydrology13050135
UR  - https://doi.org/10.3390/hydrology13050135
AB  - Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) satellites primarily monitor changes in land water storage, including groundwater, soil moisture, lake and river surface water, and canopy and snow water. However, its coarse spatial resolution of 0.25 degrees limits its ability to observe smaller basins. To assess aquifer depletion and evaluate a long-term water resource management framework, GRACE data are crucial. It remains rare for GRACE-focused studies to be conducted in great depth. A comprehensive review of 80 articles published between 2011 and 2025 was conducted using the Scopus and Web of Science databases. These articles focused on downscaling GRACE data using machine learning (ML) methods. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) reporting guidelines were used in this review. This study highlights the attributes of ML models, the input variables used, the evaluation metrics, and the output resolution. Based on the analysis of the articles, random forest (RF) methods were used in the majority of the papers. Gradient boosting (GB), artificial neural networks (ANN), support vector machines (SVM), support vector regression (SVR), and long short-term memory (LSTM) were the most widely used ML methods. As input variables, rainfall (Pr), soil moisture (SM), and runoff (Qs) are essential. In 2011, there were very few journal articles; since 2021, the number has increased. The number of published studies from China was the highest (24), followed by the USA (12) and Iran (9). A total of 38 journals published reviewed articles. In terms of articles, Remote Sensing generates 19%, Journal of Hydrology has 10%, and Journal of Hydrology: Regional Studies has 8%. The paper also discusses limitations, challenges, recommendations, and potential future directions for improving the accuracy of the GWS change prediction model.
SN  - 2306-5338
ER  -