Improving model structure and reducing parameter uncertainty in conceptual water balance models through the use of auxiliary data

Son, Kyongho; Sivapalan, Murugesu

doi:10.1029/2006wr005032

Cited by 142 publications

(149 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

144

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…FDCs have been used previously in model calibration and evaluation (Blazkova and Beven, 2009;Son and Sivapalan, 2007;Sugawara, 1979;Yu and Yang, 2000). The novel aspect of our use of the FDC is that it takes account of uncertainty in the discharge data and at the same time shows that the FDC can work surprisingly well as a single criterion in some cases.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Calibration of hydrological models using flow-duration curves

Westerberg

Guerrero

Younger

et al. 2011

Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci.

244

243

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The degree of belief we have in predictions from hydrologic models will normally depend on how well they can reproduce observations. Calibrations with traditional performance measures, such as the Nash-Sutcliffe model efficiency, are challenged by problems including: (1) uncertain discharge data, (2) variable sensitivity of different performance measures to different flow magnitudes, (3) influence of unknown input/output errors and (4) inability to evaluate model performance when observation time periods for discharge and model input data do not overlap. This paper explores a calibration method using flow-duration curves (FDCs) to address these problems. The method focuses on reproducing the observed discharge frequency distribution rather than the exact hydrograph. It consists of applying limits of acceptability for selected evaluation points (EPs) on the observed uncertain FDC in the extended GLUE approach. Two ways of selecting the EPs were tested -based on equal intervals of discharge and of volume of water. The method was tested and compared to a calibration using the traditional model efficiency for the daily four-parameter WAS-MOD model in the Paso La Ceiba catchment in Honduras and for Dynamic TOPMODEL evaluated at an hourly time scale for the Brue catchment in Great Britain. The volume method of selecting EPs gave the best results in both catchments with better calibrated slow flow, recession and evaporation than the other criteria. Observed and simulated time Correspondence to: I. K. Westerberg (ida.westerberg@hyd.uu.se) series of uncertain discharges agreed better for this method both in calibration and prediction in both catchments. An advantage with the method is that the rejection criterion is based on an estimation of the uncertainty in discharge data and that the EPs of the FDC can be chosen to reflect the aims of the modelling application, e.g. using more/less EPs at high/low flows. While the method appears less sensitive to epistemic input/output errors than previous use of limits of acceptability applied directly to the time series of discharge, it still requires a reasonable representation of the distribution of inputs. Additional constraints might therefore be required in catchments subject to snow and where peak-flow timing at sub-daily time scales is of high importance. The results suggest that the calibration method can be useful when observation time periods for discharge and model input data do not overlap. The method could also be suitable for calibration to regional FDCs while taking uncertainties in the hydrological model and data into account.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Flow-duration curves have previously been used in model calibration by Sugawara (1979), Yu and Yang (2000), as one of the criteria considered by Refsgaard and Knudsen (1996) and by Blazkova and Beven (2009), and as a qualitative measure of model performance, e.g. by Houghton-Carr (1999), Kavetski et al (2011), and Son and Sivapalan (2007).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Calibration of hydrological models using flow-duration curves

Westerberg

Guerrero

Younger

et al. 2011

Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci.

244

243

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some examples of studies applying the topdown approach include Young (1998Young ( , 2003, Jothityangkoon et al (2001), Son and Sivapalan (2007), Fenicia et al (2008aFenicia et al ( , 2016, Kavetski and Fenicia (2011), Gharari et al (2014a), Hrachowitz et al (2014), Willems (2014) or more recently Garavaglia et al (2017).…”

Section: Top-down Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

HESS Opinions: The complementary merits of competing modelling philosophies in hydrology

Hrachowitz

Clark

2017

Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci.

183

130

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. In hydrology, two somewhat competing philosophies form the basis of most process-based models. At one endpoint of this continuum are detailed, high-resolution descriptions of small-scale processes that are numerically integrated to larger scales (e.g. catchments). At the other endpoint of the continuum are spatially lumped representations of the system that express the hydrological response via, in the extreme case, a single linear transfer function. Many other models, developed starting from these two contrasting endpoints, plot along this continuum with different degrees of spatial resolutions and process complexities. A better understanding of the respective basis as well as the respective shortcomings of different modelling philosophies has the potential to improve our models. In this paper we analyse several frequently communicated beliefs and assumptions to identify, discuss and emphasize the functional similarity of the seemingly competing modelling philosophies. We argue that deficiencies in model applications largely do not depend on the modelling philosophy, although some models may be more suitable for specific applications than others and vice versa, but rather on the way a model is implemented. Based on the premises that any model can be implemented at any desired degree of detail and that any type of model remains to some degree conceptual, we argue that a convergence of modelling strategies may hold some value for advancing the development of hydrological models.

show abstract

“…FDCs are used extensively in hydrologic analyses and have been 10 qualitatively used for evaluating model performance (Son and Sivapalan, 2007), but are rarely used during calibration of a hydrologic model. While flow duration curves eliminate the timing of flows, they are a quick and easy means to evaluate which components of the flow regime (high, moderate, or low flows) are systematically under-or over-predicting.…”

Section: ) Is Shown Inmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multiple domain evaluation of watershed hydrology models

Kumarasamy

Belmont

2017

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Watershed scale models simulating hydrology and water quality have advanced rapidly in sophistication, process 5 representation, flexibility in model structure, and input data. Given the importance of these models to support decision-making for a wide range of environmental issues, the hydrology community is compelled to improve the metrics used to evaluate model performance. More targeted and comprehensive metrics will facilitate better and more efficient calibration and will help demonstrate that the model is useful for the intended purpose. Here we introduce a suite of new tools for model evaluation,packaged as an open-source Hydrologic Model Evaluation (HydroME) Toolbox. Specifically, we demonstrate the use of box 10 plots to illustrate the full distribution of common model performance metrics, such as R 2 , use of Euclidian distance, empirical Quantile-Quantile (Q-Q) plots and flow duration curves as simple metrics to identify and localize errors in model simulations.Further, we demonstrate the use of magnitude squared coherence to compare the frequency content between observed and modeled streamflow and wavelet coherence to localize frequency mismatches in time. We provide a rationale for a hierarchical selection of parameters to adjust during calibration and recommend that modelers progress from parameters with the most 15 uncertainty to the least uncertainty, namely starting with pure calibration parameters, followed by derived parameters, and finally measured parameters. We apply these techniques in the calibration and evaluation of models of two watersheds, the Le Sueur River Basin (2880 km 2 ) and Root River Basin (4300 km 2 ) in southern Minnesota, USA.

show abstract

Improving model structure and reducing parameter uncertainty in conceptual water balance models through the use of auxiliary data

Cited by 142 publications

References 39 publications

Calibration of hydrological models using flow-duration curves

Calibration of hydrological models using flow-duration curves

HESS Opinions: The complementary merits of competing modelling philosophies in hydrology

Multiple domain evaluation of watershed hydrology models

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About