2002
DOI: 10.2166/wst.2002.0271
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Sensitivity analysis and auto-calibration of an integral dynamic model for river water quality

Abstract: ESWAT – Extended Soil and Water Assessment Tool – was developed to allow for an integral modelling of the water quantity and quality processes in river basins. ESWAT is a physically based, semi-distributed model, with a moderate-to-large number of parameters and input and output variables (depending on the desegregation scheme). An auto-calibration procedure was implemented for the optimisation of the process parameters. The procedure is based on a new approach for multi-objective calibration and incorporates … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
41
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 89 publications
(41 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
41
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Additionally, to examine the relative performance across all months between each Mode we generated Taylor diagrams for each of the simulated flux terms which employ three statistics: the centred RMSE (E 0 ), the correlation coefficient (R), and the standard deviation (r) (Taylor, 2001): To test the sensitivity of SUEWS to differences in meteorological forcing data (for example differences which might arise between off-site and on-site stations) we employed a one-factor-a-time (OFAT) approach (Griensven et al, 2002). First, we generated highly typified data i.e.…”
Section: Model Evaluation and Sensitivitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Additionally, to examine the relative performance across all months between each Mode we generated Taylor diagrams for each of the simulated flux terms which employ three statistics: the centred RMSE (E 0 ), the correlation coefficient (R), and the standard deviation (r) (Taylor, 2001): To test the sensitivity of SUEWS to differences in meteorological forcing data (for example differences which might arise between off-site and on-site stations) we employed a one-factor-a-time (OFAT) approach (Griensven et al, 2002). First, we generated highly typified data i.e.…”
Section: Model Evaluation and Sensitivitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The Salsola was divided into 18 sub-basins, and the Celone into 9 sub-basins. Prior to calibration, the sensitivity analysis (SA) developed by van Griensven et al (2002) was conducted for 27 parameters to assess the most sensitive hydrological parameters that can influence river flow. The SA was then carried out using streamflow simulation at the Salsola P.te FG (gauge 4, in Fig.…”
Section: Modeling Streamflowmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A parameter sensitivity analysis method is embedded in SWAT to determine the relative ranking of those parameters that most affect the output variance due to input variability (van Griensven et al, 2002). The SWAT model, version 2005, also has an autocalibration procedure embedded that is used to obtain an optimal fit of process parameters.…”
Section: Model Backgroundmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The SWAT model, version 2005, also has an autocalibration procedure embedded that is used to obtain an optimal fit of process parameters. This procedure incorporates the shuffled complex evolution method, which uses a global optimization standard for calibration in which multiple output parameters can be integrated concurrently (van Griensven et al, 2002). A statistical method uses the fit of the observed series to its related simulated series and translates the normalized values of the objective functions (van Griensven and Bauwens, 2003) per variable.…”
Section: Model Backgroundmentioning
confidence: 99%