Multi-site calibration of the SWAT model for hydrologic modeling

Transactions of the ASABE

Volumn 51, Issue 6, 2008, Pages 2039-2049

  Zhang, Xuesong ^a   Srinivasan, Raghavan ^a,c   Van Liew, Michael ^b  

^a TEXAS A AND M UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b Montana Department of Environmental Quality   (United States)

^c NONE   (United States)

Author keywords

Automatic calibration; Distributed hydrologic model; Multi objective optimization; Multi site calibration; SWAT

Indexed keywords

CALIBRATION; GENETIC ALGORITHMS; PARAMETER ESTIMATION; SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION; STREAM FLOW; WATER RESOURCES; WATERSHEDS;

AUTOMATIC CALIBRATION; DISTRIBUTED HYDROLOGIC MODEL; MULTI-SITE CALIBRATION; OBJECTIVE FUNCTION VALUES; REYNOLDS CREEK EXPERIMENTAL WATERSHED; SINGLE OBJECTIVE OPTIMIZATION; SOIL AND WATER ASSESSMENT TOOL; SWAT;

MULTIOBJECTIVE OPTIMIZATION;

ALGORITHM; CALIBRATION; ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING; HYDROLOGICAL MODELING; OPTIMIZATION; STREAMFLOW; WATERSHED;

IDAHO; NORTH AMERICA; REYNOLDS CREEK; UNITED STATES;

EID: 58149214516     PISSN: 21510032     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Arnold, J. G., R. Srinivasan, R. S. Muttiah, and J. R. Williams. 1998. Large-area hydrologic modeling and assessment: Part I. Model development. J. American Water Resources Assoc. 34(1): 73-89.
2. Arnold, J. G., R. Srinivasan, R. S. Muttiah, and P. M. Allen. 1999. Continental-scale simulation of the hydrologic balance. J. American Water Resources Assoc. 35(5): 1037-1052.
3. Bekele, E. G., and J. W. Nicklow. 2007. Multi-objective automatic calibration of SWAT using NSGA-II. J. Hydrol. 341(3-4): 165-176.
4. Beven, K. J. 2000. Rainfall-Runoff Modelling: The Primer. New York, N.Y.: John Wiley and Sons.
5. Cao, W., B. W. Bowden, T. Davie, and A. Fenemor. 2006. Multi-variable and multi-site calibration and validation of SWAT in a large mountainous catchment with high spatial variability. Hydrol. Process. 20(5): 1057-1073.
6. Chu, T. W., and A. Shirmohammadi. 2004. Evaluation of the SWAT model's hydrology component in the Piedmont physiographic region of Maryland. Trans. ASAE 47(4): 1057-1073.
7. Demarty, J., C. Ottlé, I. Braud, A. Olioso, J. P. Frangi, H. V. Gupta, and L. A. Bastidas. 2005. Constraining a physically based soil-vegetation-atmosphere transfer model with surface water content and thermal infrared brightness temperature measurements using a multiobjective approach. Water Resources Res. 41: W01011, doi: 10.1029/2004WR003695.
8. Duan, Q., S. Sorooshian, and V. K. Gupta. 1992. Effective and efficient global optimization for conceptual rainfall-runoff models. Water Resources Res. 28(4): 1015-1031.
9. Eckhardt, K., N. Fohrer, and H. G. Frede. 2005. Automatic model calibration. Hydrol. Process. 19(3): 651-658.
10. Engeland, K., I. Braud, L. Gottschalk, and E. Leblois. 2006. Multi-objective regional modelling. J. Hydrol. 327(3-4): 339-351
11. Gassman, P. W., M. Reyes, C. H. Green, and J. G. Arnold. 2007. The Soil and Water Assessment Tool: Historical development, applications, and future directions. Trans. ASABE 50(4): 1212-1250.
12. Goldberg, D. 1989. Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization and Machine Learning. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley.
13. Gollamudi, A., C. A. Madramootoo, and P. Enright. 2007. Water quality modeling of two agricultural fields in southern Quebec using SWAT. Trans. ASABE 50(3): 1973-1980.
14. Gupta, H. V., S. Sorooshian, and P. O. Yapo. 1998. Toward improved calibration of hydrologic models: Multiple and noncommensurate measures of information. Water Resources Res. 34(4): 751-763.
15. Holland, J. 1975. Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems. Ann Arbor, Mich.: University of Michigan Press.
16. Khu, S. T., and H. Madsen. 2005. Multiobjective calibration with Pareto preference ordering: An application to rainfall-runoff model calibration. Water Resources Res. 41: W03004, doi: 10.1029/2004WR003041.
17. Legates, D. R., and G. J. McCabe. 1999. Evaluating the use of "goodness of fit" measures in hydrologic and hydroclimatic model validation. Water Resources Res. 35(1): 233-241.
18. Massey, F. J., Jr. 1951. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test of goodness of fit. J. American Stat. Assoc. 46(253): 68-78.
19. Migliaccio, K. W., and I. Chaubey. 2007. Comment on W. Cao, B. W. Bowden, T. Davie, and A. Fenemor. 2006. Multi-variable and multi-site calibration and validation of SWAT in a large mountainous catchment with high spatial variability. Hydrol. Process. 21(4): 3326-3328.
20. Nash, J. E., and J. V. Sutcliffe. 1970. River flow forecasting through conceptual models: Part I. A discussion of principles. J. Hydrol. 10(3): 282-290.
21. Neitsch, S. L., A. G. Arnold, J. R. Kiniry, J. R. Srinivasan, and J. R. Williams. 2005. Soil and Water Assessment Tool User's Manual: Version 2005. TR-192. College Station, Tex.: Texas Water Resources Institute.
22. Reca, J., and J. Martínez. 2006. Genetic algorithms for the design of looped irrigation water distribution networks. Water Resources Res. 42: W05416, doi: 10.1029/2005WR004383.
23. Santhi, C., J. G. Arnold, J. R. Williams, L. M. Hauck, and W. A. Dugas. 2001a. Application of a watershed model to evaluate management effects on point and nonpoint source pollution. Trans. ASAE 44(6): 1559-1570.
24. Santhi, C., J. G. Arnold, J. R. Williams, W. A. Dugas, and L. Hauck. 2001b. Validation of the SWAT model on a large river basin with point and nonpoint sources. J. American Water Resources Assoc. 37(5): 1169-1188.
25. Schaffer, J. D., R. A. Caruana, L. J. Eshelman, and R. Das. 1989. A study of control parameters affecting online performance of genetic algorithms for function optimization. In Proc. 3rd Intl. Conf. on Genetic Algorithms, 51-60. J. D. Schaffer, ed. San Mateo, Cal.: Morgan Kaufmann.
26. Seyfried, M. S., R. C. Harris, D. Marks, and B. Jacob. 2000. A geographic database for watershed research, Reynolds Creek Experimental Watershed, Idaho, USA. Tech. Bulletin NWRC-2000-3. Washington, D.C.: USDA-ARS.
27. Sloan, P. G., I. D. Morre, G. B. Coltharp, and J. D. Eigel. 1983. Modeling surface and subsurface stormflow on steeply sloping forested watersheds. Water Resources Institute Report 142. Lexington, Ky.: University of Kentucky.
28. Spruill, C. A., S. R. Workman, and J. L. Taraba. 2000. Simulation of daily and monthly stream discharge from small watersheds using the SWAT model. Trans. ASAE 43(6): 1431-1439.
29. Srinivasan, R., J. G. Arnold, and C. A. Jones. 1998. Hydrologic modeling of the United States with the soil and water assessment tool. Water Resources Development 14(3): 315-325.
30. Tang, Y., P. Reed, and T. Wagener. 2006. How effective and efficient are multiobjective evolutionary algorithms at hydrologic model calibration- Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 10(2): 289-307.
31. Tolson, B. A., and C. A. Shoemaker. 2007. Dynamically dimensioned search algorithm for computationally efficient watershed model calibration. Water Resources Res. 43: W01413, doi: 10.1029/2005WR004723.
32. USDA-SCS. 1972. Chapter 4-10, Section 4: Hydrology. In National Engineering Handbook. Washington, D.C.: USDA-SCS.
33. van Griensven, A., and W. Bauwens. 2003. Multiobjective autocalibration for semidistributed water quality models. Water Resources Res. 39(12): 1348, doi: 10.1029/2003WR002284.
34. van Griensven, A., and W. Bauwens. 2005. Application and evaluation of ESWAT on the Dender basin and Wister Lake basin. Hydrol. Process. 19(3): 827-838.
35. van Griensven, A., T. Meixner, S. Grunwald, T. Bishop, M. Di luzio, and R. Srinivasan. 2006. A global sensitivity analysis tool for the parameters of multi-variable catchment models. J. Hydrol. 324: 10-23.
36. Van Liew, M. W., and J. Garbrecht. 2003. Hydrologic simulation of the Little Washita River experimental watershed using SWAT. J. American Water Resources Assoc. 39(2): 413-426.
37. Van Liew, M. W., J. G. Arnold, and D. D. Bosch, 2005. Problems and potential of autocalibrating a hydrologic model. Trans. ASAE 50(3): 1025-1040.
38. Van Liew, M. W., T. L. Veith, D. D. Bosch, and J. G. Arnold. 2007. Suitability of SWAT for the Conservation Effects Assessment Project: A comparison on USDA-ARS watersheds. J. Hydrol. Eng. 12(2): 173-189.
39. White, L. K., and I. Chaubey, 2005. Sensitivity analysis, calibration, and validations for a multisite and multivariable SWAT model. J. American Water Resources Assoc. 41(5): 1077-1089.
40. Wolpert, D. H., and W. G. Macready. 1997. No free lunch theorems for optimization. IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. 1(1): 67-82.
41. Yapo, P. O., H. V. Gupta, and S. Sorooshian. 1998. Multi-objective global optimization for hydrologic models. J. Hydrol. 204: 83-97.
42. Zhang, X., R. Srinivasan, and F. Hao. 2007. Predicting hydrologic response to climate change in the Luohe River basin using the SWAT model. Trans. ASABE 50(3): 901-910.
43. Zhang, X., R. Srinivasan, B. Debele, and F. Hao. 2008a. Runoff simulation of the headwaters of the Yellow River using the SWAT model with three snowmelt algorithms. J. American Water Resources Assoc. 44(1): 48-61.
44. Zhang, X., R. Srinivasan, K. Zhao, and M. Van Liew. 2008b. Evaluation of global optimization algorithms for parameter calibration of a computationally intensive hydrologic model. Hydrol. Process. (in press).
45. Zitzler, E., and L. Thiele. 1999. Multiobjective evolutionary algorithms: A comparative case study and the Strength Pareto approach. IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. 3(4): 257-271.
46. Zitzler, E., M. Laumanns, and L. Thiele. 2001. SPEA2: Improving the performance of the strength Pareto evolutionary algorithm. Tech. Report 103. Zurich, Switzerland: Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH), Computer Engineering and Communication Networks Lab (TIK).