Ensemble evaluation of hydrological model hypotheses

被引:86
作者
Krueger, Tobias [1 ]
Freer, Jim [2 ]
Quinton, John N. [1 ]
Macleod, Christopher J. A. [3 ]
Bilotta, Gary S. [5 ]
Brazier, Richard E. [4 ]
Butler, Patricia [3 ]
Haygarth, Philip M. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Lancaster, Lancaster Environm Ctr, Lancaster LA1 4YQ, England
[2] Univ Bristol, Sch Geog Sci, Bristol BS8 1SS, Avon, England
[3] Cross Inst Programme Sustainable Soil Funct, Okehampton EX20 2SB, England
[4] Univ Exeter, Dept Geog, Exeter EX4 4RJ, Devon, England
[5] Univ Brighton, Sch Environm & Technol, Brighton BN2 4GJ, E Sussex, England
基金
英国生物技术与生命科学研究理事会;
关键词
RAINFALL-RUNOFF MODELS; MULTIMODEL DATA FUSION; UNCERTAINTY; CALIBRATION; COMBINATION; VARIABILITY; PREDICTION; FORECASTS; OUTPUTS; SCALE;
D O I
10.1029/2009WR007845
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
It is demonstrated for the first time how model parameter, structural and data uncertainties can be accounted for explicitly and simultaneously within the Generalized Likelihood Uncertainty Estimation (GLUE) methodology. As an example application, 72 variants of a single soil moisture accounting store are tested as simplified hypotheses of runoff generation at six experimental grassland field-scale lysimeters through model rejection and a novel diagnostic scheme. The fields, designed as replicates, exhibit different hydrological behaviors which yield different model performances. For fields with low initial discharge levels at the beginning of events, the conceptual stores considered reach their limit of applicability. Conversely, one of the fields yielding more discharge than the others, but having larger data gaps, allows for greater flexibility in the choice of model structures. As a model learning exercise, the study points to a "leaking" of the fields not evident from previous field experiments. It is discussed how understanding observational uncertainties and incorporating these into model diagnostics can help appreciate the scale of model structural error.
引用
收藏
页数:17
相关论文
共 62 条
[1]   Multi-model data fusion for river flow forecasting: an evaluation of six alternative methods based on two contrasting catchments [J].
Abrahart, RJ ;
See, L .
HYDROLOGY AND EARTH SYSTEM SCIENCES, 2002, 6 (04) :655-670
[2]   An integrated hydrologic Bayesian multimodel combination framework: Confronting input, parameter, and model structural uncertainty in hydrologic prediction [J].
Ajami, Newsha K. ;
Duan, Qingyun ;
Sorooshian, Soroosh .
WATER RESOURCES RESEARCH, 2007, 43 (01)
[3]   Multimodel combination techniques for analysis of hydrological simulations: Application to Distributed Model Intercomparison Project results [J].
Ajami, Newsha K. ;
Duan, Qingyun ;
Gao, Xiaogang ;
Sorooshian, Soroosh .
JOURNAL OF HYDROMETEOROLOGY, 2006, 7 (04) :755-768
[4]   HYDROLOGICAL CONSEQUENCES OF ARTIFICIAL-DRAINAGE OF GRASSLAND [J].
ARMSTRONG, AC ;
GARWOOD, EA .
HYDROLOGICAL PROCESSES, 1991, 5 (02) :157-174
[5]  
AVERY BW, 1980, TECH MONOGR ROTHAMST, V14
[6]   WATER-QUALITY MODELING - A REVIEW OF THE ANALYSIS OF UNCERTAINTY [J].
BECK, MB .
WATER RESOURCES RESEARCH, 1987, 23 (08) :1393-1442
[7]   On the concept of model structural error [J].
Beven, K .
WATER SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, 2005, 52 (06) :167-175
[8]   A manifesto for the equifinality thesis [J].
Beven, K .
JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGY, 2006, 320 (1-2) :18-36
[9]   THE FUTURE OF DISTRIBUTED MODELS - MODEL CALIBRATION AND UNCERTAINTY PREDICTION [J].
BEVEN, K ;
BINLEY, A .
HYDROLOGICAL PROCESSES, 1992, 6 (03) :279-298
[10]   Toward improved calibration of hydrologic models: Combining the strengths of manual and automatic methods [J].
Boyle, DP ;
Gupta, HV ;
Sorooshian, S .
WATER RESOURCES RESEARCH, 2000, 36 (12) :3663-3674