Has basin-scale modelling advanced beyond empiricism?

IAHS-AISH Publication

Volumn , Issue 307, 2006, Pages 108-116

  Michel, C ^a   Perrin, C ^a   Andreassian V ^a   Oudin, L ^b   Mathevet, T ^a  

^a CEMAGREF   (France)

^b SORBONNE UNIVERSITÉ   (France)

Author keywords

Catchments; Empiricism; Lumped modelling; Rainfall runoff modelling; Time step

Indexed keywords

ALARM SYSTEMS; CATCHMENTS; HYDROLOGY; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; RAIN;

EMPIRICISM; TIME-STEP;

ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING;

BASIN; NUMERICAL MODEL; RAINFALL; RAINFALL-RUNOFF MODELING; STREAMFLOW;

EID: 33845590027     PISSN: 01447815     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Babovic, V. (2005) Data mining in hydrology. Hydrol. Processes 19(7), 1511-1515.
2. Bergström, S. (1991) Principles and confidence in hydrological modelling. Nordic Hydrology, 22, 123-136.
3. Beven, K. J. (1989) Changing ideas in hydrology - the case of physically-based models. J. Hydrol. 105, 157-172.
4. Beven, K. (2001) On explanatory depth and predictive power. Hydrol. Processes 15(15), 3069-3072.
5. Eder, G., Sivapalan, M. & Nachtnebel, H. P. (2003) Modelling water balances in an Alpine catchment through exploitation of emergent properties over changing time scales. Hydrol. Processes 17(11), 2125-2149.
6. Güntner, A., Uhlenbrook, S., Seibert, J. & Leibundgut, C. (1999) Multi-criterial validation of TOPMODEL in a mountainous catchment. Hydrol. Processes 13(11), 1603-1620.
7. Jakeman, A. J. & Hornberger, G. M. (1993) How much complexity is warranted in a rainfall-runoff model? Water Resour. Res. 29(8), 2637-2649.
8. Joerin, C., Beven, K. J., Musy, A. & Talamba, D. (2005) Study of hydrological processes by the combination of environmental tracing and hill slope measurements: application on the Haute-Mentue catchment. Hydrol. Processes 19(16), 3127-3145, doi:10.1002/hyp.5836.
9. Jothityangkoon, C., Sivapalan, M. & Farmer, D. L. (2001) Process controls of water balance variability in a large semiarid catchment: downward approach to hydrological model development. J. Hydrol. 254(1-4), 174-198.
10. Klemeš, V. (1983) Conceptualization and scale in Hydrology. J. Hydrol. 65, 1-23.
11. Lamb, R., Beven, K. and Myrabø, S. (1998) Use of spatially distributed water table observations to constrain uncertainty in a rainfall-runoff model. Adv. Water Resour. 22(4), 305-317.
12. Linsley, R. K. (1982) Rainfall-runoff models-an overview. In: Proc. Int. Symp. Rainfall-Runoff Modelling (ed. by V. P. Singh), 3-22. Water Resources Publications, Littleton, Colorado, USA.
13. League, K. & VanderKwaak, J. E. (2004) Physics-based hydrologic response simulation: platinium bridge, 1958 Edsel, or useful tool. Hydrol. Processes 18(15), 2949-2956.
14. Martin, P. H. (1996) Physics of stamp-collecting? Thoughts on ecosystem model design. Sci Total Environ. 183, 7-15.
15. Moore, R. J. (1985) The probability-distributed principle and runoff production at point and basin scales. Hydrol. Sci. J. 30(2), 273-297.
16. Moradkhani, H., Hsu, K-L., Gupta, H. & Sorooshian, S. (2005) Uncertainty assessment of hydrological model states and parameters: Sequential data assimilation using the particle filter. Water Resour. Res. 41, W05012, doi:10.1029/2004WR003604.
17. Mouelhi, S. (2003) Vers une chaîne cohérente de modèles pluie-débit conceptuels globaux aux pas de temps pluriannuel, annuel, mensuel et journalier. PhD Thesis, ENGREF, Cemagref Antony, France (in French).
18. Nash, J. E. & Sutcliffe, J. V. (1970) River flow forecasting through conceptual models. Part I - A discussion of principles. J. Hydrol. 27(3), 282-290.
19. Oreskes, N., Shrader-Frechette, K. & Belitz, K. (1994) Verification, validation and confirmation of numerical models in the Earth Sciences. Science 263, 644-646.
20. Perrin, C., Michel, C. & Andréassian, V. (2001) Does a large number of parameters enhance model performances? Comparative assessment of common catchment model structures on 429 catchments. J. Hydrol. 242, 275-301.
21. Refsgaard, J. C. & Henriksen, H. J. (2004) Modelling guidelines - terminology and guiding principles. Adv. Water Resour. 27(1), 71-82.
22. Seibert, J. (2001) On the need for benchmarks in hydrological modelling. Hydrol. Processes 15(6), 1063-1064.
23. Sivapalan, M. (2003) Process complexity at hillslope scale, process simplicity at the watershed scale: is there a connection. Hydrol. Processes 17(3), 1037-1041.
24. Sivapalan, M., Zhang, L., Vertessy, R. & Blöschl, O. (eds) (2003) Downward approach to hydrological prediction. Hydrol. Processes 17(11), 2099-2326.
25. Smith, M. B., Seo, D. J., Koren, V. I., Reed, S. M., Zhang, Z., Duan, Q., Moreda, F. & Cong, S. (2004) The distributed model intercomparison project (DMIP): motivation and experiment design. J. Hydrol. 298(1-4), 4-26.
26. Young, P. C. (1998) Data-based mechanistic modelling of environmental, ecological, economic and engineering systems. Environ. Modelling Software 13, 105-102.
27. Young, P. (2003) Top-down and data-based mechanistic modelling of rainfall-flow dynamics at the catchment scale. Hydrol. Processes 17(11), 2195-2217.
28. von Bertalanffy, L. (1968) General Systems Theory. Georges Braziller, New York, USA.