Legacy, Rather Than Adequacy, Drives the Selection of Hydrological Models

被引:134
作者
Addor, N. [1 ]
Melsen, L. A. [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ East Anglia, Climat Res Unit, Sch Environm Sci, Norwich, Norfolk, England
[2] Wageningen Univ, Hydrol & Quantitat Water Management Grp, Wageningen, Netherlands
基金
瑞士国家科学基金会;
关键词
model selection; model evaluation; bibliometric study; text mining; community model; modular modeling frameworks; INTERCOMPARISON PROJECT; SCIENCE; WATER; NEED; IMPLEMENTATION; FRAMEWORK; PROTOCOL; SCHEMES; SUPPORT; SYSTEM;
D O I
10.1029/2018WR022958
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
The findings of hydrological modeling studies depend on which model was used. Although hydrological model selection is a crucial step, experience suggests that hydrologists tend to stick to the model they have experience with, and rarely switch to competing models, although these models might be more adequate given the study objectives. To gain quantitative insights into model selection, we explored the use of seven rainfall-runoff models based on the abstract of 1,529 peer-reviewed papers published between 1991 and 2018. The models selected were the Hydrologiska Byrans Vattenbalansavdelning model (HBV), the Variable Infiltration Capacity model (VIC), the mesoscale Hydrological model (mHM), the TOPography-based hydrologic model (TOPMODEL), the Precipitation Runoff Modelling System (PRMS), the Genie Rural model a 4 parametres Journaliers (GR4J), and the Sacramento soil moisture accounting model. We provide quantitative evidence of regional preferences in model use across the world and demonstrate that specific models are consistently preferred by certain institutes. Model attachment is particularly strong. In similar to 74% of the studies, the model selected can be predicted solely based on the affiliation of the first author. The influence of adequacy on the model selection process is less clear. Our data reveal that each model is used across a wide range of purposes, landscapes, and temporal and spatial scales (i.e., as a model of everything and everywhere). Model intercomparisons can provide guidance for model selection and improve model adequacy, but they are still rare (because each model must usually be setup individually) and the insights they provide are currently limited (because they are rarely controlled experiments). We suggest that moving from fixed-structure models to modular modeling frameworks (master templates for model generation) can overcome these issues, enable a more collaborative and responsive model development environment, and result in improved model adequacy.
引用
收藏
页码:378 / 390
页数:13
相关论文
共 89 条
[21]   Hydrological field data from a modeller's perspective: Part 2: process-based evaluation of model hypotheses [J].
Clark, Martyn P. ;
McMillan, Hilary K. ;
Collins, Daniel B. G. ;
Kavetski, Dmitri ;
Woods, Ross A. .
HYDROLOGICAL PROCESSES, 2011, 25 (04) :523-543
[22]   Framework for Understanding Structural Errors (FUSE): A modular framework to diagnose differences between hydrological models [J].
Clark, Martyn P. ;
Slater, Andrew G. ;
Rupp, David E. ;
Woods, Ross A. ;
Vrugt, Jasper A. ;
Gupta, Hoshin V. ;
Wagener, Thorsten ;
Hay, Lauren E. .
WATER RESOURCES RESEARCH, 2008, 44
[23]   Crash testing hydrological models in contrasted climate conditions: An experiment on 216 Australian catchments [J].
Coron, L. ;
Andreassian, V. ;
Perrin, C. ;
Lerat, J. ;
Vaze, J. ;
Bourqui, M. ;
Hendrickx, F. .
WATER RESOURCES RESEARCH, 2012, 48
[24]   Diagnostic evaluation of multiple hypotheses of hydrological behaviour in a limits-of-acceptability framework for 24 UK catchments [J].
Coxon, G. ;
Freer, J. ;
Wagener, T. ;
Odoni, N. A. ;
Clark, M. .
HYDROLOGICAL PROCESSES, 2014, 28 (25) :6135-6150
[25]  
Craig J. R., 2018, RAVEN USERS DEVELOPE
[26]   Integrating Logistical and Technical Criteria into a Multiteam, Competitive Watershed Model Ranking Procedure [J].
Cunderlik, Juraj M. ;
Fleming, Sean W. ;
Jenkinson, R. Wayne ;
Thiemann, Michael ;
Kouwen, Nicholas ;
Quick, Michael .
JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGIC ENGINEERING, 2013, 18 (06) :641-654
[27]   Looking beyond general metrics for model comparison - lessons from an international model intercomparison study [J].
de Boer-Euser, Tanja ;
Bouaziz, Laurene ;
De Niel, Jan ;
Brauer, Claudia ;
Dewals, Benjamin ;
Drogue, Gilles ;
Fenicia, Fabrizio ;
Grelier, Benjamin ;
Nossent, Jiri ;
Pereira, Fernando ;
Savenije, Hubert ;
Thirel, Guillaume ;
Willems, Patrick .
HYDROLOGY AND EARTH SYSTEM SCIENCES, 2017, 21 (01) :423-440
[28]   Catchment properties, function, and conceptual model representation: is there a correspondence? [J].
Fenicia, Fabrizio ;
Kavetski, Dmitri ;
Savenije, Hubert H. G. ;
Clark, Martyn P. ;
Schoups, Gerrit ;
Pfister, Laurent ;
Freer, Jim .
HYDROLOGICAL PROCESSES, 2014, 28 (04) :2451-2467
[29]   Elements of a flexible approach for conceptual hydrological modeling: 1. Motivation and theoretical development [J].
Fenicia, Fabrizio ;
Kavetski, Dmitri ;
Savenije, Hubert H. G. .
WATER RESOURCES RESEARCH, 2011, 47
[30]  
Fleming S.W., 2009, Streamline Watershed Management Bulletin, V13, P32