Informal likelihood measures in model assessment: Theoretic development and investigation

Advances in Water Resources

Volumn 31, Issue 8, 2008, Pages 1087-1100

  Smith, Paul ^a   Beven, Keith J ^a,b   Tawn, Jonathan A ^a  

^a LANCASTER UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b UPPSALA UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Bayes theorem; GLUE; Informal likelihood; Performance criteria

Indexed keywords

EARTH SCIENCES; FISH; PARAMETER ESTIMATION; WATER;

(I ,J) CONDITIONS; (PL) PROPERTIES; ANALYTICAL RESULTS; BAYESIAN FRAMEWORKS; ELSEVIER (CO); ERROR SOURCES; MODEL ASSESSMENTS; MODEL OUTPUTS; MODEL PARAMETERS; NASH SUTCLIFFE EFFICIENCY (NSE); OBSERVED DATA; PARAMETER SPACES; PERFORMANCE CRITERION; UNCERTAINTY ESTIMATION;

STOCHASTIC MODELS;

BAYESIAN ANALYSIS; EFFICIENCY MEASUREMENT; ERROR ANALYSIS; HYDROLOGY; PARAMETERIZATION; PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT; THEORETICAL STUDY; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS;

EID: 46849086011     PISSN: 03091708     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.advwatres.2008.04.012     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Duan Q.Y., Sorooshian S., and Gupta V. Effective and efficient global optimization for conceptual Rainfall-Runoff models. Water Resour Res 28 4 (1992) 1015-1031
2. Chowdhury S., and Sharma A. Mitigating parameter bias in hydrological modelling due to uncertainty in the covariates. J Hydrol 340 (2007) 197-204
3. Gupta H.V., Sorooshian S., and Yapo P.O. Toward improved calibration of hydrologic models: Multiple and noncommensurable measures of information. Water Resour Res 34 4 (1998) 751-763
4. Yapo P.O., Gupta H.V., and Sorooshian S. Multi-objective global optimization for hydrologic models. J Hydrol 204 1-4 (1998) 83-97
5. Beven K., and Binley A. The future of distributed models - model calibration and uncertainty prediction. Hydrol Process 6 3 (1992) 279-298
6. Kuczera G., and Parent E. Monte Carlo assessment of parameter uncertainty in conceptual catchment models: the Metropolis algorithm. J Hydrol 211 1-4 (1998) 69-85
7. Kennedy M.C., and O'Hagan A. Bayesian calibration of computer models. J Roy Stat Soc Ser B - Stat Meth 63 (2001) 425-450
8. Moradkhani H, Hsu KL, Gupta H, Sorooshian S. Uncertainty assessment of hydrologic model states and parameters: Sequential data assimilation using the particle filter. Water Resources Research 2005;41(5): art. no.-W05012.
9. Moradkhani H., Sorooshian S., Gupta H.V., and Houser P.R. Dual state-parameter estimation of hydrological models using ensemble Kalman filter. Adv Water Res 28 2 (2005) 135-147
10. Thiemann M., Trosset M., Gupta H., and Sorooshian S. Bayesian recursive parameter estimation for hydrologic models. Water Resour Res 37 10 (2001) 2521-2535
11. Vrugt JA, Bouten W, Gupta HV, Sorooshian S. Toward improved identifiability of hydrologic model parameters: The information content of experimental data. Water Resour Res 2002;38(12): art. no.-1312.
12. Vrugt JA, Gupta HV, Bastidas LA, Bouten W, Sorooshian S. Effective and efficient algorithm for multiobjective optimization of hydrologic models. Water Resour Res 2003;39(8): art. no.-1214.
13. Wagener T., McIntyre N., Lees M.J., Wheater H.S., and Gupta H.V. Towards reduced uncertainty in conceptual rainfall-runoff modelling: Dynamic identifiability analysis. Hydrol Process 17 2 (2003) 455-476
14. Feller W. An introduction to probability theory and its applications vol. 2 (1971), Wiley
15. Lee P. Bayesian statistics: an introduction (2004), Arnold, London
16. Garrick M., Cunnane C., and Nash J.E. Criterion of efficiency for rainfall-runoff models. J Hydrol 36 3-4 (1978) 375-381
17. Bartholmes J., and Todini E. Coupling meteorological and hydrological models for flood forecasting. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 9 4 (2005) 333-346
18. Nash J.E., and Sutcliffe J. River flow forecasting through conceptual models, part I: A discussion of principles. J Hydrol 10 3 (1970) 282-290
19. Beven K. Calibration, validation and equifinality in hydrological modelling: A continuing discussion. In: Anderson M.G., and Bates P.D. (Eds). Model validation: Perspectives in hydrological science (2001), John Wiley & Sons Ltd 43-55
20. Beven K. A manifesto for the equifinality thesis. J Hydrol 320 1-2 (2006) 18-36
21. Beven K, Young P. In: Thiemann M, Trosset M, Gupta H, Sorooshian S, editors, Comment on Bayesian recursive parameter estimation for hydrologic models. Water Resour Res 2003;39(5): art. no.-1116.
22. Gupta H, Thiemann M, Trosset M, Sorooshian S. Reply to comment by Beven K, Young P. on "Bayesian recursive parameter estimation for hydrologic models", Water Resour Res 2003;39(5): art. no.-1117.
23. Kavetski D., Franks S., and Kuczera G. Confronting input uncertainty in environmental modelling. In: Duan Q., Gupta H., Sorooshian S., Rousseau A.N., and Turcotte R. (Eds). Calibration of watershed models Vol. 6 (2003), American Geophysical Unionr 49-68
24. Wagener T., Boyle D.P., Lees M.J., Wheater H.S., Gupta H.V., and Sorooshian S. A framework for development and application of hydrological models. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 5 1 (2001) 13-26
25. Beven K. How far can we go in distributed hydrological modelling?. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 5 1 (2001) 1-12
26. Beven K. Towards a coherent philosophy for modelling the environment. Proc Roy Soc Lond Ser A - Math Phys Engng Sci 458 2026 (2002) 2465-2484
27. Herschy R. Accuracy. In: Herschy R. (Ed). Hydrometry: Principles and practices (1978), Wiley 353-398
28. Moyeed R.A., and Clarke R.T. The use of Bayesian methods for fitting rating curves, with case studies. Adv Water Resour 28 8 (2005) 807-818
29. Petersen-Overleir A. Accounting for heteroscedasticity in rating curve estimates. J Hydrol 292 1-4 (2004) 173-181
30. Freer J.E., McMillan H., McDonnell J.J., and Beven K.J. Constraining dynamic TOPMODEL responses for imprecise water table information using fuzzy rule based performance measures. J Hydrol 291 3-4 (2004) 254-277
31. Blazkova S., Beven K.J., and Kulasova A. On constraining TOPMODEL hydrograph simulations using partial saturated area information. Hydrol Process 16 2 (2002) 441-458
32. Doherty J., and Johnston J.M. Methodologies for calibration and predictive analysis of a watershed model. J Am Water Resour Assoc 39 2 (2003) 251-265
33. Kavetski D, Kuczera G, Franks SW. Semidistributed hydrological modeling: A "saturation path" perspective on TOPMODEL and VIC. Water Resour Res 2003;39(9): art. no.-1246.
34. Kuczera G. Improved Parameter Inference In Catchment Models.1. Evaluating Parameter Uncertainty. Water Resour Res 19 5 (1983) 1151-1162
35. Peters N.E., Freer J., and Beven K. Modelling hydrologic responses in a small forested catchment (Panola Mountain, Georgia, USA): a comparison of the original and a new dynamic TOPMODEL. Hydrol Process 17 2 (2003) 345-362
36. Grimmett G., and Welsh D. Probability: an introduction (1986), Clarendon, Oxford
37. Legates D.R., and McCabe G.J. Evaluating the use of goodness-of-fit measures in hydrologic and hydroclimatic model validation. Water Resour Res 35 1 (1999) 233-241
38. Shamir E., Imam B., Gupta H.V., and Sorooshian S. Application of temporal streamflow descriptors in hydrologic model parameter estimation. Water Resour Res 41 (2005) W06021
39. Shamir E., Imam B., Morin E., Gupta H.V., and Sorooshian S. The role of hydrograph indices in parameter estimation of rainfall-runoff models. Hydrol Process 19 11 (2005) 2187-2207
40. Chiew F., and McMahon T. Application of the Daily Rainfall-Runoff Model Modhydrolog to 28 Australian Catchments. J Hydrol 153 1-4 (1994) 383-416
41. Willmott C.J., Ackleson S.G., Davis R.E., Feddema J.J., Klink K.M., Legates D.R., et al. Statistics for the Evaluation and Comparison of Models. J Geophys Res-Oceans 90 NC5 (1985) 8995-9005
42. Murphy A.H. Skill scores based on the mean-square error and their relationships to the correlation-coefficient. Month Weather Rev 116 12 (1988) 2417-2425
43. Mantovan P., and Todini E. Hydrological forecasting uncertainty assessment: Incoherence of the glue methodology. J Hydrol 330 1-2 (2006) 368-381
44. Mantovan P, Todini E. Coherence of the statistical inference process in hydrological forecasting, Tech. rep., University of Venice, 2004. URL www.dst.unive.it/mantovan.
45. Beven K., Smith P., and Freer J. So just why would a modeller choose to be incoherent?. J Hydrol 354 (2008) 15-32
46. Nelder J.A., and Mead R. A Simplex-Method for Function Minimization. Comput J 7 4 (1965) 308-313
47. Chib S. Marginal likelihood from the Gibbs output. J Am Stat Assoc 90 432 (1995) 1313-1321
48. Gilks W.R., and Richardson S. In: Spiegelhalter D. (Ed). Markov Chain Monte Carlo in practice (1996), Chapman & Hall 0412055511
49. Freer J., McDonnell J., Beven K.J., Brammer D., Burns D., Hooper R.P., et al. Topographic controls on subsurface storm flow at the hillslope scale for two hydrologically distinct small catchments. Hydrol Process 11 9 (1997) 1347-1352