Quantitative comparison of spatial fields for hydrological model assessment - some promising approaches

被引:57
作者
Wealands, SR [1 ]
Grayson, RB
Walker, JP
机构
[1] Univ Melbourne, Dept Civil & Environm Engn, Cooperat Res Ctr Catchment, Melbourne, Vic 3010, Australia
[2] Univ Melbourne, Dept Civil & Environm Engn, Parkville, Vic 3010, Australia
关键词
spatial; fields; patterns; comparison; quantitative; model assessment;
D O I
10.1016/j.advwatres.2004.10.001
中图分类号
TV21 [水资源调查与水利规划];
学科分类号
081501 ;
摘要
The current practice for assessing spatial predictions from distributed hydrological models is simplistic, with visual inspection and occasional point observations generally used for model assessment. With the increasing availability of spatial observations from remote sensing and intensive field studies, the current methods for assessing the spatial component of model predictions need to advance. This paper emphasises the role that spatial field comparisons can play in model assessment. A review of the current methods used in hydrology, and other disciplines where spatial field comparisons are widely used, reveals some promising methods for quantitatively comparing spatial fields. These promising approaches-segmentation, importance maps, fuzzy comparison and multiscale comparison-are for local comparison of spatial fields. They address some of the weaknesses with the current approaches to spatial field comparison used in hydrological modelling and, in doing so, emulate some aspects of human visual comparison. The potential of these approaches for assessing spatial predictions and understanding model performance is illustrated with a simple example. (C) 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:15 / 32
页数:18
相关论文
共 75 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2000, TERRAIN ANAL PRINCIP
[2]  
[Anonymous], 1995, EYE MOVEMENT RES MEC
[3]   Assessing the uncertainty in distributed model predictions using observed binary pattern information within GLUE [J].
Aronica, G ;
Bates, PD ;
Horritt, MS .
HYDROLOGICAL PROCESSES, 2002, 16 (10) :2001-2016
[4]  
Baatz M., 2000, ANGEW GEOGRAPHISCHE, P12, DOI DOI 10.3390/RS5010183
[5]   PROPHECY, REALITY AND UNCERTAINTY IN DISTRIBUTED HYDROLOGICAL MODELING [J].
BEVEN, K .
ADVANCES IN WATER RESOURCES, 1993, 16 (01) :41-51
[6]   THE FUTURE OF DISTRIBUTED MODELS - MODEL CALIBRATION AND UNCERTAINTY PREDICTION [J].
BEVEN, K ;
BINLEY, A .
HYDROLOGICAL PROCESSES, 1992, 6 (03) :279-298
[7]   Towards an alternative blueprint for a physically based digitally simulated hydrologic response modelling system [J].
Beven, K .
HYDROLOGICAL PROCESSES, 2002, 16 (02) :189-206
[8]  
Blöschl G, 2000, SPATIAL PATTERNS IN CATCHMENT HYDROLOGY, P17
[9]  
BLOSCHL G, 1995, HYDROL PROCESS, V9, P251, DOI 10.1002/hyp.3360090305
[10]  
Bow Sing T, 2002, PATTERN RECOGNITION