Parameter estimation in distributed hydrological modelling: Comparison of global and local optimisation techniques

Nordic Hydrology

Volumn 38, Issue 4-5, 2007, Pages 451-476

  Blasone, R S ^a   Madsen, H ^b   Rosbjerg, Dan ^a  

^a TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF DENMARK   (Denmark)

^b DHI   (Denmark)

Author keywords

Distributed hydrological models; Global and local optimisation methods; Multi objective calibration; Parameter estimation

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHMS; CALIBRATION; COMPUTER SIMULATION; GROUNDWATER; MULTIOBJECTIVE OPTIMIZATION; PARAMETER ESTIMATION; RAIN; RUNOFF;

DISTRIBUTED HYDROLOGICAL MODEL; GRADIENT-BASED GAUSS-MARQUARD-LEVENBERG ALGORITHM; MULTI-OBJECTIVE CALIBRATION; SHUFFLED COMPLEX EVOLUTION ALGORITHM;

HYDROLOGY;

ALGORITHM; ESTIMATION METHOD; GROUNDWATER; HYDROLOGICAL MODELING; OPTIMIZATION; PARAMETERIZATION; RAINFALL-RUNOFF MODELING;

EID: 37349002754     PISSN: 00291277     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2166/nh.2007.024     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. Bentley, L.R. (1993). Least squares solutions and calibration of steady state groundwater flow systems. Adv. Wat. Res., 16, 137-148.
2. Beven, K.J. and Binley, A.M. (1992). The future of distributed models: model calibration and uncertainty prediction. Hydrol. Process., 6, 279-298.
3. Boyle, D.P., Gupta, H.V. and Sorooshian, S. (2000). Towards improved calibration of hydrologic models: combining the strengths of manual and automatic methods. Wat. Res. Res., 36(12), 3663-3674.
4. Carrera, J. and Neuman, S.P. (1986). Estimation of aquifer parameters under transient and steady state conditions: 1. Maximum likelihood method incorporating prior information. Wat. Res. Res., 22, 199-210.
5. Christensen, S. and Cooley, R.L. (1999). Evaluation of confidence intervals for a steady-state leaky aquifer model. Adv. Wat. Res., 22(8), 807-817.
6. Cooper, V.A., Nguyen, V.T.V. and Nicell, J.A. (1997). Evaluation of global optimization methods for conceptual rainfall-runoff model calibration. Wat. Sci. Technol., 35(5), 53-60.
7. Dawdy, D.R. and O'Donnell, T. (1965). Mathematical models of catchment behaviour. J. Hydraul. Div. ASCE, 91(HY4), 123-137.
8. D'Agnese, F.A., Faunt, C.C., Hill, M.C. and Turner, A.K. (1999). Death valley regional ground-water flow model calibration using optimal parameter estimation methods and geoscientific information systems. Adv. Wat. Res., 22(8), 777-790.
9. DHI (2004). AUTOCAL, Autocalibration Tool, User Guide, DHI Water & Environment, Denmark.
10. Doherty, J. (2005). PEST: Model Independent Parameter Estimation, User Manual (5th edn), Watermark Numerical Computing, Brisbane, Australia.
11. Dornes, P.F. (2003). Calibration Strategy for Parameter Estimation in the MIKE SHE Modelling System. Master of Science thesis. International Institute for Infrastructural, Hydraulic and Environmental Engineering, IHE, Delft, The Netherlands.
12. Duan, Q., Sorooshian, S. and Gupta, V. (1992). Effective and efficient global optimization for conceptual rainfall-runoff models. Wat. Res. Res., 28(4), 1015 -1031.
13. Duan, Q., Sorooshian, S. and Gupta, V.K. (1994). Optimal use of the SCE-UA global optimization method for calibrating watershed models. J. Hydrol., 158(3-4), 265-284.
14. Dubus, I.G., Beulke, S., Brown, C.D., Gottensbüren, B. and Dieses, A. (2004). Inverse modelling for estimating sorption and degradation parameters for pesticides. Pest Mngmnt. Sci., 60, 859-874.
15. Eckhardt, K. and Arnold, J.G. (2001). Automatic calibration of distributed catchment model. J. Hydrol., 251, 103-109.
16. Franchini, M. and Galeati, G. (1997). Comparing several genetic algorithm schemes for the calibration of conceptual rainfall-runoff models. Hydrol. Sci. J., 42(3), 357-379.
17. Franchini, M., Galeati, G. and Berra, S. (1998). Global optimization techniques for the calibration of conceptual rainfall-runoff models. Hydrol. Sci. J., 43(3), 443-458.
18. Gan, T.Y. and Bifru, G.F. (1996). Automatic calibration of conceptual rainfallrunoff models: optimization algorithms, catchment conditions, and model structure. Wat. Res. Res., 32(12), 3513-3524.
19. Graham, D.N. and Butts, M.B. (2006). Flexible, integrated watershed modelling with MIKE. In in V.P. Singh and D.K. Frevert (Eds.), Watershed Models, CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp. 245-272.
20. Gupta, H.V., Bastidas, L., Vrugt, J.A. and Sorooshian, S. (2003). Multiple criteria global optimization for watershed model calibration. In in Q Duan, et al. (Eds.), Calibration of Watershed Models, Water Sci. Appl. Ser. 6. AGU, Washington, DC, pp. 125-132.
21. Gupta, H.V., Sorooshian, S. and Yapo, P.O. (1998). Toward improved calibration of hydrological models: multiple and noncommensurable measures of information. Wat. Res. Res., 34(4), 751-763.
22. Heidari, M. and Ranjithan, S.R. (1998). A hybrid optimization approach to the estimation of distributed parameters in two-dimensional confined aquifers. J. AWRA, 34(4), 909-920.
23. Henriksen, H.J., Troldborg, L., Nyegaard, P., Sonnenborg, T.O., Refsgaard, J.C. and Madsen, B. (2003). Methodology for construction, calibration and validation of a national hydrological model for Denmark. J. Hydrol, 280(1-4), 52-71.
24. Hill, M.C. (1998). Methods and Guidelines for Effective Model Calibration. U S Geological Survey, Water Resources Investigations Report 98-4005. US Geological Survey, Denver, CO. Available at: http://wwwbrr.cr.usgs.gov/projects/GW_Subsurf/mchill/pubs/method/ wr984005.pdf.
25. Hsieh, L.S. and Wang, R.Y. (1999). Semi-distributed parallel-type linear reservoir rainfall-runoff model and its application in Taiwan. Hydrol. Process., 13(8), 1247-1268.
26. Islam, N., Wallender, W.W., Mitchell, J., Wicks, S. and Howitt, R.E. (2006). A comprehensive experimental study with mathematical modeling to investigate the affects of cropping practices on water balance variables. Agric. Wat. Mngmnt., 82, 129-147.
27. Johnston, P.R. and Pilgrim, D.H. (1976). Parameter optimization for watershed models. Wat. Res. Res., 12(3), 477-486.
28. Kristensen, K.J. and Jensen, S.E. (1975). Model for estimating actual evapotranspiration from potential evapotanspiration. Nordic Hydrol., 6(3), 170-188.
29. Kuczera, G. (1997). Efficient subspace probabilistic parameter optimization for catchment models. Wat. Res. Res., 33, 177-185.
30. Kuczera, G. and Mroczkowski, M. (1998). Assessment of hydrologic parameter uncertainty and the worth of multiresponse data. Wat. Res. Res., 34(6), 1481-1489.
31. Lee, R.H. and Wang, R.Y. (1998). Parameter estimation with colored noise effect for differential hydrological grey model. J. Hydrol., 208(1-2), 1-15.
32. Madsen, H, (2000). Automatic calibration of a conceptual rainfall-runoff model using multiple objectives. J. Hydrol., 235, 276-288.
33. Madsen, H. (2003). Parameter estimation in distributed hydrological catchment modelling using automatic calibration with multiple objectives. Adv. Wat. Res., 26, 205-216.
34. Madsen, H., Wilson, G. and Ammentorp, H.C. (2002). Comparison of different automatic strategies for calibration of rainfall-runoff models. J. Hydrol., 261, 48-59.
35. Marshall, L., Nott, D. and Sharma, A. (2004). A comparative study of Markov Chain Monte Carlo methods for conceptual rainfall-runoff modelling. Wat. Res. Res., 40. W02501, doi: 10.1029/ 2003WR002379.
36. McKay, M.D., Conover, W.J. and Beckman, R.J. (1979). A comparison of three methods for selecting values of input variables in the analysis of output from a computer code. Technometrics, 21, 239-245.
37. McLaughlin, D. and Townley, L.R. (1996). A reassessment of the groundwater inverse problem. Wat. Res. Res., 32(5), 1131-1161.
38. Mertens, I., Madsen, H., Feyeti, L., Jacques, D. and Feyen, D. (2004). Including prior information in the estimation of effective soil parameters in unsaturated zone modelling. J. Hydrol., 295, 251-269.
39. Moore, C. and Doherty, J. (2006). The cost of uniqueness in groundwater model calibration. Adv. Wat. Res., 29, 605-623.
40. Muleta, M.K. and Nicklow, J.W. (2005). Sensitivity and uncertainty analysis coupled with automatic calibration for a distributed watershed model. J. Hydrol., 306, 127-145.
41. Nash, J.E. and Sutcliffe, J.V. (1970). River flow forecasting through conceptual models. 1. A discussion of principles. J. Hydrol., 10(3), 282-290.
42. Nelder, J.A. and Mead, R. (1965). A simplex method for function minimization. Comput. J., 7(4), 308-313.
43. Pareto, V (1906). Manuale di Economica Politica. Societa' Editrice Libraria, Milano, Italy (Schwier, A.S (1971) Manual of Political Economy. Macmillan, New York, English translation).
44. Poeter, E.P. and Hill, M.C. (1997). Inverse models: a necessary next step in ground-water modeling. Ground Water, 35(2), 250-260.
45. Poeter, E.P. and Hill, M.C. (1998). Documentation of UCODE, a Computer Code for Universal Inverse Modeling. U S Geological Survey, Water Resources Investigations Report 98-4080. US Geological Survey, Denver, CO. Available at: http://www.mines.edu/igwmc/freeware/ucode/ Ucode-PREJUPITER/UCODEmanual_wrir98-4080.pdf.
46. Refsgaard, J.C. (1997). Parameterisation, calibration and validation of distributed hydrological models. J. Hydrol., 198, 69-97.
47. Shigidi, A. and Garcia, L.A. (2003). Parameter estimation in groundwater hydrology using artificial neural networks. J. Comput. Civil Engng., 17(4), 281-289.
48. Skahill, B.E. and Doherty, J. (2006). Efficient accommodation of local minima in watershed model calibration. J. Hydrol., 329, 122-139.
49. Solomatine, D.P., Dibiki, Y.B. and Kukuric, N. (1999). Automatic calibration of groudwater models using global optimisation techniques. Hydrol. Sci. J., 44(6), 879-894.
50. Sonnenborg, T.O., Christensen, B.S.B., Nyegaard, P., Henriksen, H.J. and Refsgaard, J.C. (2003). Transient modeling of regional groundwater flow using parameter estimates from steady-state automatic calibration. J. Hydrol., 273(1), 188-204.
51. Sorooshian, S. and Gupta, V.K. (1995). Model calibration. In Computer Models of Watershed Hydrology, V.P. Singh (Ed.),, Water Resources Publications, Colorado, pp. 23-68.
52. Sumner, N.R., Fleming, P.M. and Bates, B.C. (1997). Calibration of a modified SFB model for twenty-five Australian catchments using simulated annealing. J. Hydrol., 197, 166-188.
53. Thyer, M., Kuczera, G. and Bates, B.C. (1999). Probabilistic optimization for conceptual rainfall-runoff models: a comparison of the shuffled complex evolution and simulated annealing algorithms. Wat. Res. Res., 35(3), 767-773.
54. van Griensven, A. and Bauwens, W. (2003). Multiobjective autocalibration for semidistributed water quality models. Wat. Res. Res., 39(12), 1348. doi: 10.1029/2003WR002284.
55. Vrugt, J.A., Gupta, H.V., Bastidas, L.A., Bouten, W. and Sorooshian, S. (2003a). Effective and efficient algorithm for multi-objective optimization of hydrologic models. Wat. Res. Res., 39(8), 1214. doi: 10.1029/2002WR001746.
56. Vrugt, J.A., Gupta, H.V., Bouten, W. and Sorooshian, S. (2003b). A Shuffled Complex Evolution Metropolis algorithm for optimization and uncertainty assessment of hydrologic model parameters. Wat. Res. Res., 39(8), 1201. doi: 10.1029/2002WR001642.
57. Wang, Q.J. (1991). The genetic algorithm and its application to calibrating conceptual rainfall - runoff models. Wal. Res. Res., 27(9), 2467-2471.
58. Yapo, P.O., Gupta, H.V. and Sorooshian, S. (1998). Multi-objective global optimization for hydrologic models. J. Hydrol., 204, 93-97.
59. Zyvoloski, G., Kwicklis, E., Eddebbarh, A.A., Arnold, B., Faunt, C. and Robinson, B.A. (2003). The site-scale saturated zone flow model of Yucca Mountain: calibration of different conceptual models and their impact on flow paths. J. Contam. Hydrol., 62-63, 731-750.