Characterization of watershed model behavior across a hydroclimatic gradient

Water Resources Research

Volumn 44, Issue 1, 2008, Pages

  Van Werkhoven, Kathryn ^a   Wagener, Thorsten ^a   Reed, Patrick ^a   Tang, Yong ^a  

^a The Pennsylvania State University   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

MATHEMATICAL MODELS; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SOIL MOISTURE;

FUNDAMENTAL TRADEOFF; HYDROCLIMATIC GRADIENT; SOIL MOISTURE ACCOUNTING MODEL;

WATERSHEDS;

MATHEMATICAL MODELS; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SOIL MOISTURE; WATERSHEDS;

BASEFLOW; CALIBRATION; HYDROGRAPH; HYDROLOGICAL MODELING; MODEL TEST; PEAK FLOW; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; WATER BUDGET; WATERSHED;

NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES;

EID: 39749149573     PISSN: 00431397     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1029/2007WR006271     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Abbott, M. B., J. C. Bathurst, J. A. Cunge, P. E. O'Connell, and J. Rasmussen (1986), An introduction to the European hydrological system - Systeme Hydrologique Europeen, "SHE", 1. History and philosophy of a physically-based, distributed modeling system, J. Hydrol., 87(1-2), 45-59.
2. Anderson, E. A. (2002), Calibration of conceptual hydrologic models for use in river forecasting, NOAA Tech. Rep. NWS 45, Hydrol. Lab., Silver Spring, Md.
3. Anderson, R. M., V. I. Koren, and S. M. Reed (2006), Using SSURGO data to improve Sacramento Model a priori parameter estimates, J. Hydrol., 320(1-2), 103-116.
4. Bastidas, L. A., T. S. Hogue, S. Sorooshian, H. V. Gupta, and W. J. Shuttleworth (2006), Parameter sensitivity analysis for different complexity land surface models using mulficriteria methods, J. Geophys. Res., 111, D20101, doi:10.1029/2005JD006377.
5. Bekele, E. G., and J. W. Nicklow (2005), Multiobjective management of ecosystem services by integrative watershed modeling and evolutionary algorithms, Water Resour. Res., 41, W10406, doi:10.1029/2005WR004090.
6. Beven, K. J. (1989), Changing ideas in hydrology - The case of physically-based models, J. Hydrol., 105(1-2), 157-172.
7. Boyle, D. P., H. V. Gupta, and S. Sorooshian (2000), Toward improved calibration of hydrologic models: Combining the strengths of manual and automatic methods, Water Resour. Res., 36(12), 3663-3674.
8. Boyle, D. P., H. V. Gupta, S. Sorooshian, V. Koren, Z. Y. Zhang, and M. Smith (2001), Toward improved streamflow forecasts: Value of semidistributed modeling, Water Resour. Res., 37(11), 2749-2759.
9. Brantley, P., and B. L. Fox (1988), Algorithm 659: Implementing Sobol's quasi-random sequence generator, ACM Trans. Math. Software, 14, 88-100.
10. Brazil, L. E. (1988), Multilevel calibration strategy for complex hydrologic simulation models, Ph.D. thesis, 217 pp., Colo. State University, Fort Collins.
11. Buras, N. (2001), Water resources - Unresolved issues, J. Water Resour. Plann. Manage., 127(6), 353.
12. Burnash, R. J. C. (1995), The NWS River Forecast System - Catchment model, in Computer Models of Watershed Hydrology, edited by V. P. Singh, pp. 311-366, Water Resour. Publ., Highlands Ranch, Colo.
13. Demaria, E. M., B. Njissen, and T. Wagener (2007), Monte Carlo sensitivity analysis of land surface parameters using the Variable Infiltration Capacity model, J. Geophys. Res., 112, D11113, doi:10.1029/2006JD007534.
14. Duan, Q., S. Sorooshian, and V. K. Gupta (1994), Optimal use of the SCE-UA global optimization method for calibrating watershed models, J. Hydrol., 158(3-4), 265-284.
15. Duan, Q., J. Schaake, and V. Koren (2001), A Priori estimation of land surface model parameters, in Land Surface Hydrology, Meteorology, and Climate, Observations and Modeling, Water Sci. and Appl. Ser., vol. 3, edited by V. Lakshmi, J. Albertson and J. Schaake, pp. 77-94, AGU, Washington, D. C.
16. Duan, Q., et al. (2006), Model Parameter Estimation Experiment (MOPEX): An overview of science strategy and major results from the second and third workshops, J. Hydrol., 320(1-2), 3-17.
17. Fenicia, F., H. H.G. Savenije, P. Matgen, and L. Pfister (2007), A comparison of alternative multiobjective calibration strategies for hydrological modeling, Water Resour. Res., 43, W03434, doi:10.1029/2006WR005098.
18. Freer, J., K. J. Beven, and B. Ambroise (1996), Bayesian estimation of uncertainty in runoff prediction and the value of data: An application of the GLUE approach, Water Resour. Res., 32(1), 2161-2173.
19. Gan, T. Y., and S. J. Burges (2006), Assessment of soil-based and calibrated parameters of the Sacramento model and parameter transferability, J. Hydrol., 320(1-2), 117-131.
20. Gupta, H. V., S. Sorooshian, and P. O. Yapo (1998), Toward improved calibration of hydrologic models: Multiple and noncommensurable measures of information, Water Resour. Res., 34(4), 751-763.
21. Hall, J. W., S. Tarantola, P. D. Bates, and M. S. Horritt (2005), Distributed sensitivity analysis of flood inundation model calibration, J. Hydrol. Eng., 131(2), 117-126.
22. Hogue, T. S., S. Sorooshian, H. V. Gupta, A. Holtz, and D. Braatz (2000), A multistep automatic calibration scheme for river forecasting models, J. Hydrometeorol., 1, 524-542.
23. Hogue, T. S., H. V. Gupta, and S. Sorooshian (2006), A 'user-friendly' approach to parameter estimation in hydrologic models, J. Hydrol., 320(1-2), 202-211.
24. Hornberger, G. M., and R. C. Spear (1981), An Approach to the Preliminary-Analysis of Environmental Systems, J. Environ. Manage., 12(1), 7-18.
25. Jakeman, A. J., and G. M. Hornberger (1993), How much complexity is warranted in a rainfall-runoff model, Water Resour. Res., 29(8), 2637-2649.
26. Jakeman, A. J., I. G. Littlewood, and P. G. Whitehead (1990), Computation of the instantaneous unit-hydrograph and identifiable component flows with application to 2 small upland catchments, J. Hydrol., 117(1-4), 275-300.
27. Koren, V. (2000), Use of soil property data in the derivation of conceptual rainfall-runoff model parameters, paper presented at 15th Conference on Hydrology, Am. Meteorol. Soc., Long Beach, Calif.
28. Koren, V., M. Smith, and Q. Duan (2003), Use of a priori parameter estimates in the derivation of spatially consistent parameter sets on rainfall-runoff models, in Calibration of Watershed Models, Water Sci. and Appl. Ser., vol. 6, edited by Q. Duan et al., pp. 239-254, AGU, Washington, D. C.
29. Koren, V., S. Reed, M. Smith, Z. Zhang, and D. J. Seo (2004), Hydrology Laboratory Research Modeling System (HL-RMS) of the U. S. National Weather Service, J. Hydrol., 291(3-4), 297-318.
30. Lehmann, E. L., and H. J. M. D'Abrera (1998), Nonparametrics: Statistical Methods Based on Ranks, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N. J.
31. Madsen, H. (2000), Automatic calibration of a conceptual rainfall-runoff model using multiple objectives, J. Hydrol., 235(3-4), 276-288.
32. Muleta, M. K., and J. W. Nicklow (2005), Sensitivity and uncertainty analysis coupled with automatic calibration for a distributed watershed model, J. Hydrol., 306(1-4), 127-145.
33. Pappenberger, F., I. Iorgulescu, and K. J. Beven (2006), Sensitivity analysis based on regional splits and regression trees (SARS-RT), Environ. Modell. Software, 21(7), 976-990.
34. Pappenberger, F., K. J. Beven, M. Ratto, and P. Matgen (2008), Multi-method global sensitivity analysis of flood inundation models, Adv. Water Resour., 31(1), doi:10.1016/j.advwatres.2007.04.09.
35. Reggiani, P., M. Sivapalan, and S. M. Hassanizadeh (2000), Conservation equations governing hillslope responses: Exploring the physical basis of water balance, Water Resour. Res., 36(7), 1845-1863.
36. Saltelli, A. (2002), Making best use of model evaluations to compute sensitivity indices, Comput. Phys. Commun., 145(2), 280-297.
37. Saltelli, A., S. Tarantola, and K. Chan (1999), A quantitative model-independent method for global sensitivity analysis of model output, Technometrics, 41, 39-56.
38. Sieber, A., and S. Uhlenbrook (2005), Sensitivity analyses of a distributed catchment model to verify the model structure, J. Hydrol., 310(1-4), 216-235.
39. Singh, V. P., and D. K. Frevert (Ed.) (2006), Watershed Models, CRC Press, Boca Raton, Fla.
40. Sobol, I. M. (1967), On the distribution of points in a cube and the approximate evaluation of integrals, USSR Comput. Math. Math. Phys., 7, 86-112.
41. Sobol, I. M. (1993), Sensitivity estimates for nonlinear mathematical models, Math. Model. Comput. Exp., 1, 407-417.
42. Sobol, I. M. (2001), Global sensitivity indices for nonlinear mathematical models and their Monte Carlo estimates, Math. Comput. Simul., 55, 271-280.
43. Sorooshian, S., Q. Y. Duan, and V. K. Gupta (1993), Calibration of rainfall-runoff models - Application of global optimization to the Sacramento soil-moisture accounting model, Water Resour. Res., 29(4), 1185-1194.
44. Tang, Y., P. M. Reed, and T. Wagener (2006), How effective and efficiert are multiobjective evolutionary algorithms at hydrologic model calibration?, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 10(2), 289-307.
45. Tang, Y., P. M. Reed, and J. B. Kollat (2007a), Parallelization strategies for rapid and robust evolutionary multiobjective optimization in water resources applications, Adv. Water Resour., 30(3), 335-353.
46. Tang, Y., P. M. Reed, T. Wagener, and K. van Werkhoven (2007b), Comparing sensitivity analysts methods to advance lumped watershed model identification and evaluation, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 11, 793-817.
47. Tang, Y., P. M. Reed, T. Wagener, and K. van Werkhoven (2007c), Advancing the identification and evaluation of distributed rainfall-runoff models using Sobol's global sensitivity analysis, Water Resour. Res., 43 W06415, doi:10.1029/2006WR005813.
48. Van Griensven, A., T. Meixner, S. Grunwald, T. Bishop, A. Diluzio, and R. Srinivasan (2006), A global sensitivity analysis tool for the parameters of multi-variable catchment models, J. Hydrol., 324(1-4), 10-23.
49. Vrugt, J. A., H. V. Gupta, W. Bouten, and S. Sorooshian (2003a), A Shuffled Complex Evolution Metropolis algorithm for optimization and uncertainty assessment of hydrologic model parameters, Water Resour. Res., 39(8), 1201, doi:10.1029/2002WR001642.
50. Vrugt, J. A., H. V. Gupta, L. A. Bastidas, W. Bouten, and S. Sorooshian (2003b), Effective and efficient algorithm for multiobjective optimization of hydrologic models, Water Resour. Res., 39(8), 1214, doi:10.1029/ 2002WR001746.
51. Vrugt, J. A., H. V. Gupta, S. C. Dekker, S. Sorooshian, T. Wagener, and W. Bouten (2006), Application of stochastic parameter optimization to the Sacramento Soil Moisture Accounting Model, J. Hydrol., 325(1-4), 288-307.
52. Wagener, T. (2003), Evaluation of catchment models, Hydrol. Process., 17(16), 3375-3378.
53. Wagener, T., and H. S. Wheater (2006), Parameter estimation and regionalization for continuous rainfall-runoff models including uncertainty, J. Hydrol., 320(1-2), 132-154.
54. Wagener, T., D. P. Boyle, M. J. Lees, H. S. Wheater, H. V. Gupta, and S. Sorooshian (2001), A framework for development and application of hydrological models, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 5(1), 13-26.
55. Wagener, T., N. McIntyre, M. J. Lees, H. S. Wheater, and H. V. Gupta (2003), Towards reduced uncertainty in conceptual rainfall-runoff modelling: Dynamic identifiability analysis, Hydrol. Process., 17(2), 455-476.
56. William, H., S. A. Teukolsky, T. V. William, and P. F. Brian (1999), Numerical Recipes in C, 2nd ed., Cambridge Univ. Press, New York.