Causal models as multiple working hypotheses about environmental processes

被引:84
作者
Beven, Keith [1 ,2 ,3 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Lancaster, Lancaster Environm Ctr, Lancaster LA1 4YQ, England
[2] Uppsala Univ, Geoctr, Dept Earth Sci, Uppsala, Sweden
[3] London Sch Econ, CATS, London WC2A 2AE, England
[4] Ecole Polytech Fed Lausanne, ENAC, Lab Ecohydrol, CH-1015 Lausanne, Switzerland
关键词
Environmental prediction; Model evaluation; Limits of acceptability; Modelling philosophy; Critical experiments; Epistemic uncertainties; WATERSHED THERMODYNAMICS; UNIFYING FRAMEWORK; CLIMATE-CHANGE; UNCERTAINTY; CALIBRATION; HYDROLOGY; INSTRUMENTALISM; TOPMODEL; BAYES; EQUIFINALITY;
D O I
10.1016/j.crte.2012.01.005
中图分类号
P [天文学、地球科学];
学科分类号
07 ;
摘要
The environmental modeller faces a dilemma. Science often demands that more and more process representations are incorporated into models (particularly to avoid the possibility of making missing process errors in predicting future response). Testing the causal representations in environmental models (as multiple working hypotheses about the functioning of environmental systems) then depends on specifying boundary conditions and model parameters adequately. This will always be difficult in applications to a real system because of the heterogeneities, non-stationarities, complexities and epistemic uncertainties inherent in environmental prediction. Thus, it can be difficult to define the information content of a data set used in model evaluation and any consequent measures of belief or verisimilitude. A limit of acceptability approach to model evaluation is suggested as a way of testing models, implying that thought is required to define critical experiments that will allow models as hypotheses to be adequately differentiated. (C) 2012 Published by Elsevier Masson SAS on behalf of Academie des sciences.
引用
收藏
页码:77 / 88
页数:12
相关论文
共 93 条
[51]  
Lawry J., 2006, Modelling and Reasoning with Vague Concepts
[52]   Appropriateness measures: an uncertainty model for vague concepts [J].
Lawry, Jonathan .
SYNTHESE, 2008, 161 (02) :255-269
[53]   How can rainfall-runoff models handle intercatchment groundwater flows? Theoretical study based on 1040 French catchments [J].
Le Moine, Nicolas ;
Andreassian, Vazken ;
Perrin, Charles ;
Michel, Claude .
WATER RESOURCES RESEARCH, 2007, 43 (06)
[54]   Towards a limits of acceptability approach to the calibration of hydrological models: Extending observation error [J].
Liu, Yanli ;
Freer, Jim ;
Beven, Keith ;
Matgen, Patrick .
JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGY, 2009, 367 (1-2) :93-103
[55]  
Manning R., 1891, T I CIVIL ENG, V20, P161, DOI DOI 10.1680/IMOTP.1891.20563
[56]   Tall tales from the hydrological crypt: are models monsters? [J].
Mathevet, Thibault ;
Garcon, Remy .
HYDROLOGICAL SCIENCES JOURNAL-JOURNAL DES SCIENCES HYDROLOGIQUES, 2010, 55 (06) :857-871
[57]   Realism versus instrumentalism in a new statistical framework [J].
Mikkelson, Gregory M. .
PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE, 2006, 73 (04) :440-447
[58]   MATHEMATICAL-MODELS - QUESTIONS OF TRUSTWORTHINESS [J].
MORTON, A .
BRITISH JOURNAL FOR THE PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE, 1993, 44 (04) :659-674
[59]   A methodology for probabilistic predictions of regional climate change from perturbed physics ensembles [J].
Murphy, J. M. ;
Booth, B. B. B. ;
Collins, M. ;
Harris, G. R. ;
Sexton, D. M. H. ;
Webb, M. J. .
PHILOSOPHICAL TRANSACTIONS OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY A-MATHEMATICAL PHYSICAL AND ENGINEERING SCIENCES, 2007, 365 (1857) :1993-2028
[60]   Verisimilitude: The third period [J].
Niiniluoto, I .
BRITISH JOURNAL FOR THE PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE, 1998, 49 (01) :1-29