Predictive error analysis for a water resource management model

Journal of Hydrology

Volumn 334, Issue 3-4, 2007, Pages 513-533

  Gallagher, Mark ^a,b   Doherty, John ^b,c  

^a Natural Resource Sciences   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF QUEENSLAND   (Australia)

^c Watermark Numerical Computing   (Australia)

Author keywords

Basin management; Ground water; Numerical models; Predictive uncertainty

Indexed keywords

GROUNDWATER; INVERSE PROBLEMS; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; NUMERICAL ANALYSIS; WATER CONSERVATION;

BASIN MANAGEMENT; NUMERICAL MODELS; PREDICTIVE UNCERTAINTIES;

GROUNDWATER RESOURCES;

GROUNDWATER; GROUNDWATER RESOURCES; INVERSE PROBLEMS; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; NUMERICAL ANALYSIS; WATER CONSERVATION;

BASIN MANAGEMENT; ERROR ANALYSIS; GROUNDWATER RESOURCE; HYDRAULIC PROPERTY; HYDROLOGICAL MODELING; NUMERICAL MODEL; PREDICTION; WATER LEVEL; WATER MANAGEMENT; WATER RESOURCE;

EID: 33846581374     PISSN: 00221694     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2006.10.037     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Arunakumaren, N.J., 1997. A lumped parameter model for simulating the temporal behaviour of moisture in the plant root zone and in the unsaturated zone below the root zone. LWRRDC R&D Project QP127. Department of Natural Resources and Mines, Queensland Government, Brisbane.
2. Carrera J., and Glorioso L. On geostatistical formulations of the groundwater flow inverse problem. Adv. Water Resour. 14 5 (1991) 273-283
3. Carrera J., Alcolea A., Medina A., Hidalgo A., and Slooten L. Inverse problem in hydrogeology. Hydrogeol. J. 13 (2005) 206-222
4. Certes C., and de Marsily G. Application of the pilot points method to the identification of aquifer transmissivities. Adv. Water Resour. 14 5 (1991) 284-300
5. Christensen S., and Cooley R.L. Evaluation of prediction intervals for expressing uncertainties in groundwater flow predictions. Water Resour. Res. 35 9 (1999) 2627-2639
6. Christensen, S., Cooley, R.L., 2004, User guide to the UNC process and three utility programs for computation of nonlinear confidence and prediction intervals using MODFLOW-2000: US Geological Survey Techniques and Methods Report 6-A10, US Geological Survey, Reston, VA, 195 pp.
7. Cooley, R.L., 2004. A theory for modeling ground-water flow in heterogeneous media. Professional Paper 1679, US Geological Survey, Reston, VA, 229pp.
8. De Groot-Hedlin C., and Constable S. Occam inversion to generate smooth, 2-dimensional models from magnetelluric data. Geophysics 55 12 (1990) 1613-1624
9. Doherty J. Groundwater model calibration using pilot points and regularization. Ground Water 41 2 (2003) 170-177
10. Doherty, J., 2005. PEST: Model independent parameter estimation. Watermark Numerical Computing, Corinda, Australia. .
11. Doherty, J., Gallagher, M., 2005. Analysis of predictive error of the Pioneer Valley groundwater model. Watermark Numerical Computing, Brisbane, Australia. A copy of this report in PDF format can be supplied by either of the authors on request.
12. Eden, R.N., Hazel, C.P., 1973. Computer and graphical analysis of variable discharge pumping tests of wells. The Institution of Engineers Australia. Civil Engineering Transactions, pp. 5-10.
13. El Harrouni K., Ouazar D., Wrobel L.C., and Cheng A.H.-D. Uncertainty analysis in groundwater flow with DRBEM. Eng. Anal. Bound. Elem. 19 (1997) 217-221
14. Gomez-Hernandez J.J., Franssen H.J.W.M.H., and Sahuquillo A. Stochastic conditional inverse modeling of subsurface mass transport: a brief review of the self-calibrating method. Stoch. Environ. Res. Risk A 17 (2003) 319-328
15. Gutjahr A., and Bras R.L. Spatial variability in subsurface flow and transport - a review. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Safe. 42 2-3 (1993) 293-316
16. Harbaugh, A.W., Banta, E.R., Hill, M.C., McDonald, M.G., 2000. The US Geological Survey Modular Ground-Water Model - User Guide to Modularization Concepts and the Ground-Water Flow process. US Geological Survey Open File Report 00-92. Reston, VA.
17. Hill M.C. Analysis of accuracy of approximate, simultaneous, nonlinear confidence intervals on hydraulic heads in analytical and numerical cases. Water Resour. Res. 25 2 (1989) 177-190
18. Kitanidis P.K. Recent advances in geostatistical inference on hydrogeological variables. Rev. Geophys. 33 (1995) 1103-1109
19. Kuhanesan, S., Durick, A., Werner, A., Weeks, S., Murphy, S., 2005. Groundwater amendment to the Pioneer Valley Water Resources Plan. Report 3: Groundwater flow modelling of the Pioneer Valley. Water Assessment, Resource Condition and Trend. Natural Resource Sciences, Queensland Department of Natural Resources, Mines and Water.
20. Moore, C., 2006. The use of regularised inversion in groundwater model calibration and prediction uncertainty analysis. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Queensland, Australia.
21. Moore C., and Doherty J. Role of the calibration process in reducing model predictive error. Water Resour. Res. 41 (2005) W05020 10.1029/2004WR00350
22. Moore C., and Doherty J. The cost of uniqueness in groundwater model calibration. Adv. Water Resour. 29 4 (2006) 605-623
23. Murphy, S., Kuhanesan, S., Foster, L., Durick, A., 2005. Groundwater amendment to the Pioneer Valley Water Resources Plan. Report 1: Conceptualisation of groundwater resources for the Pioneer Valley flow model. Water Assessment, Resource Condition and Trend, Natural Resource Sciences, Queensland Department of Natural Resources, Mines and Water.
24. Poeter, E.P., Hill, M.C., 1998. Documentation of UCODE, a computer code for universal inverse modelling. US Geological Survey Water. Resources Investigation Report 98-4080, p. 122.
25. Tonkin M., and Doherty J. A hybrid regularised inversion methodology for highly parameterised models. Water Resour. Res. 41 (2005) W10412 10.1029/2005WR00399
26. Vecchia A.V., and Cooley R.L. Simultaneous confidence and prediction intervals for nonlinear regression models with application to a groundwater flow model. Water Resour. Res. 23 7 (1987) 1237-1250
27. Yeh T.C.J. Stochastic modeling of groundwater-flow and solute transport in aquifers. Hydrol. Process. 6 4 (1992) 369-395
28. Zimmerman D.A., de Marsily G., Gotway C.A., Marietta M.G., Axness C.L., Beauheim R.L., Bras R.L., Carrera J., Dagan G., Davies P.B., Gallegos D.P., Galli A., Gomez-Hernandez J., Gorelick S.M., Grindrod P., Gutjahr A.L., Kitanidis P.K., LaVenue A.M., McLaughlin D., Neuman S.P., RamaRao B.S., Ravenne C., and Rubin Y. A comparison of seven geostatistically based inverse approaches to estimate transmissivities for modeling advective transport by groundwater flow. Water Resour. Res. 34 6 (1998) 1373-1413