Sensitivity and identifiability of stream flow generation parameters of the SWAT model

Hydrological Processes

Volumn 24, Issue 9, 2010, Pages 1133-1148

  Cibin, R ^a   Sudheer, K P ^b   Chaubey, I ^a  

^a PURDUE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY MADRAS   (India)

Author keywords

Global sensitivity analysis; Identifiability analysis; Sobol' Method; SWAT

Indexed keywords

CALIBRATION PROCESS; EQUIFINALITY; FLOW REGIMES; GLOBAL SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; HIGH FLOW; IDENTIFIABILITY; IDENTIFIABILITY ANALYSIS; MODEL PARAMETERS; MULTI-CRITERIA APPROACH; SENSITIVITY OF PARAMETERS; SOIL AND WATER ASSESSMENT TOOL; STREAM FLOW GENERATION; SWAT MODEL; TEMPORAL SCALE;

CALIBRATION; COMPUTER SIMULATION; GEOLOGIC MODELS; HYDRAULICS; LANDFORMS; STREAM FLOW; WATERSHEDS;

SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS;

CALIBRATION; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DECOMPOSITION ANALYSIS; HYDROLOGICAL REGIME; MULTICRITERIA ANALYSIS; NUMERICAL MODEL; PARAMETERIZATION; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; STREAMFLOW; VARIANCE ANALYSIS; WATERSHED;

EID: 77953658273     PISSN: 08856087     EISSN: 10991085     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/hyp.7568     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. Anand S, Mankin KR, McVay KA, Janssen KA, Barnes PL, Pierzynski GM. 2007. Calibration and validation of ADAPT and SWAT for field-scale runoff prediction. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 43(4): 899-910.
2. Arabi M, Govindaraju RS, Engel B, Hantush M. 2007. Multiobjective sensitivity analysis of sediment and nitrogen processes with a watershed model. Water Resources Research 43(6): W06409, DOI: 10.1029/2006WR005463
3. Arnold JG, Allen PM, Bernhardt G. 1993. A comprehensive surfaceground water flow model. Journal of Hydrology 142(1-4): 47-69.
4. Arnold JG, Fohrer N. 2005. SWAT 2000: current capabilities and research opportunities in applied watershed modeling. Hydrological Processes 19(3): 563-572.
5. Arnold JG, Muttiah RS, Srinivasan R, Allen PM. 2000. Regional estimation of base flow and groundwater recharge in the upper Mississippi basin. Journal of Hydrology 227(1-4): 21-40.
6. Arnold JG, Srinivasan R, Muttiah RS, Williams JR. 1998. Large area hydrologic modeling assessment: part I. Model development. Journa of American Water Resources Association 34(1): 73-89.
7. Beven KJ, Binley A. 1992. The future of distributed models: model calibration and uncertainty prediction. Hydrological Processes 6: 279-298.
8. Bezdek JC. 1981. Pattern recognition with fuzzy objective functions algorithms, in Advance Application in Pattern Recognition. Plenum Press: New York.
9. Cariboni J, Gatelli D, Liska R, Saltelli A. 2007. The role of sensitivity analysis in ecologic modeling. Ecological Modeling 203: 167-182.
10. Cloke HL, Pappenberger F, Renaud JP. 2008. Multi-method global sensitivity analysis (MMGSA) for modelling floodplain. Hydrological processes 22(11): 1660-1674. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hyp.6734.
11. Confesor RB, Whittaker GW. 2007. Automatic calibration of hydrologic models with multi-objective evolutionary algorithm and pareto optimization. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 43(4): 981-989.
12. Cukier RI, Fortuin CM, Shuler KE, Petschek AG, Schaibly JH. 1973. Study of sensitivity of coupled reaction systems to uncertainties in rate coefficients. Journal of Chemistry and Physics 59: 3873-3878.
13. Demaria EM, Njissen B, Wagener T. 2007. Monte Carlo sensitivity analysis of land surface parameters using the Variable Infiltration Capacity model. Journal of Geophysical Research 112: D11113.
14. Easton ZM, Fuka DR, Walter MT, Cowan DM, Schneiderman EM, Steenhuis TS. 2008. Re-conceptualizing the soil and water assessment tool (SWAT) model to predict runoff from variable source areas. Journal of Hydrology 348(3-4): 279-291.
15. Francos A, Elorza FJ, Bouraoui F, Bidoglio G, Galbiati L. 2003. Sensitivity analysis of distributed environmental simulation models: understanding the model behaviour in hydrological studies at the catchment scale. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 79(2): 205-218.
16. Freer J, Beven KJ, Ambroise B. 1996. Bayesian estimation of uncertainty in runoff prediction and the value of data: An application of the GLUE approach. Water Resource Research 32(7): 2161-2173.
17. Gassman PW, Reyes MR, Geen CH, Arnold JG. 2007. The soil and water assessment tool: historical development, applications and future research directions. Transactions of the ASABE 50(4): 1211-1250.
18. van Griensven A, Meixner T, Grunwald S, Bishop T, Diluzio M, Srinivasan R. 2006. A global sensitivity analysis tool for the parameters of multi-variable catchment models. Journal of Hydrology 324(1-4): 10-23.
19. Helton JC. 1993. Uncertainty and sensitivity analysis techniques for use in performance assessment for radioactive waste disposal. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 42: 327-367.
20. Holvoet. K, van Griensven A, Seuntjens P, Vanrolleghem PA. 2005. Sensitivity analysis for hydrology and pesticide supply towards the river in SWAT. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth 30(8-10): 518-526.
21. Homma T, Saltelli A. 1996. Importance measure in global sensitivity analysis of non linear models. Reliability Engineering System Safety 52: 1-17.
22. Johnston PR, Pilgrim H. 1976. Parameter optimization for watershed models. Water Resource Research 12(3): 477-486.
23. Lenhart T, Eckhardt K, Fohrer N, Frede HG. 2002. Comparison of two different approaches of sensitivity analysis. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth 27(9-10): 645-654.
24. Liburne L, Gatelli D, Tarantola S. 2006. Sensitivity analysis on spatial models: new approach. Proceedings of the 7th International Symposium on Spatial Accuracy Assessment in Natural Resources and Environmental Sciences
25. van Liew MWV, Garbrecht J. 2003. Hydrologic simulation of the little Washita river experimental watershed using SWAT. Journal of American Water Resources Association 39(2): 413-426.
26. Manache G, Melching CS. 2008. Identification of reliable regression- and correlation-based sensitivity measures for importance ranking of waterquality model parameters. Environmental Modeling and Software 23: 549-562.
27. McKay M, Beckman R, Conover W. 1979. A comparison of three methods for selecting values of input variables in the analysis of output from a computer code. Technometrics 21(2): 239-245.
28. Migliaccio KW, Chaubey I. 2008. Spatial distributions and stochastic parameter influences on SWAT flow and sediment predictions. Journal of Hydrologic Engineering 13(4): 258-269.
29. Muleta MK, Nicklow JW. 2005. Sensitivity and uncertainty analysis coupled with automatic calibration for a distributed watershed model. Journal of Hydrology 306(1-4): 127-145.
30. Muleta MK, Nicklow JW, Bekele EG. 2007. Sensitivity of a distributed watershed simulation model to spatial scale. Jounral of Hydrologic Engineering: ASCE 12(2): 163-172.
31. Nash JE, Sutcliffe JV. 1970. River flow forecasting through conceptual models part I-a discussion of principles. Journal of Hydrology 10(3): 282-290.
32. Neitsch SL, Arnold JG, Kiniry JR, Williams JR, King KW. 2002. Soil Water Assessment Tool Theoretical Documentation, Version 2000, TWRI Report, TR-191. Texas Water Resource Institute, College Station: Texas.
33. Osidele OO, Beck MB. 2001. Identification of model structure for aquatic ecosystems using regionalized sensitivity analysis. Water Science and Technology 43(7): 271-278.
34. Pappenberger F, Iorgulescu I, Beven KJ. 2006. Sensitivity analysis based on regional splits and regression trees (SARS-RT). Environmental Modelling and Software 21(7): 976-990.
35. Pappenberger F, Beven KJ, Ratto M, Matgen P. 2008. Multi-method global sensitivity analysis of flood inundation models. Advances in Water Resources 31(1): 1-14.
36. Ratto M, Tarantola S, Saltelli A. 2001. Sensitivity analysis in model calibration: GSA-GLUE approach. Computer Physics Communications 136: 212-224.
37. Rosso R. 1994. An introduction to spatially distributed modelling of basin response. In Advances in Distributed Hydrology, Rosso R Peano A Becchi I, Bemporad GA (eds). Water Resources Publications: Fort Collins; 3-30.
38. Safari A, De Smedt F. 2008. Stream Flow Simulation using Radar-based Precipitation Applied to the Illinois River Basin in Oklahoma, USA. Available at http://balwois.com/balwois/administration/fullpaper/ffp-906.pdf. Accessed October 19, 2009.
39. Saltelli A, Bolado R. 1998. An alternative way to compute Fourier amplitude sensitivity test. Computational Statistics and Data Analysis 26: 445-460.
40. Saltelli A, Scott EM, Chan K, Marian S. 2000. Sensitivity Analysis. John Wiley & Sons: Chichester.
41. Sobol' IM. 1993. Sensitivity estmates for nonlinear mathematical models. Mathematical Modeling and Computational Experiment 1: 404-414.
42. Sobol' IM. 2001. Global sensitivity indices for nonlinear mathematical models and their Monte Carlo estimates. Mathematics and Computers in Simulation 55(1): 271-280.
43. Sorooshian S, Gupta VK. 1995. Model calibration. In Computer Models of Watershed Hydrology, Singh VP (ed). Water Resources Publications: Highlands Ranch, Colorado, USA; 23-63.
44. Spruill CA, Workman SR, Taraba JL. 2000. Simulation of daily and monthly stream discharge from small watersheds using the SWAT model. Transactions of the ASAE 43(6): 1431-1439.
45. Stow CA, Rechhow KH, Qian SS, Lamon EC, Arhonditsis GB, Borsuk ME, Seo D. 2007. Approaches to evaluate water quality model parameter uncertainty for adaptive TMDL implementation. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 43(6): 1499-1507.
46. Sudheer KP, Chaubey I, Garg V, Migliaccio KW. 2007. Impact of timescale of the calibration objective function on the performance of watershed models. Hydrological Processes 21(25): 3409-3419.
47. Sudheer KP, Gosain AK, Ramasastri KS. 2002. A data driven algorithm for constructing ANN based rainfall-runoff models. Hydrological Processes 16(6): 1325-1330.
48. Tang Y, Reed PM, Wagener T, van Werkhoven K. 2007a. Comparing sensitivity analysis methods to advance lumped watershed model identification and evaluation. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences 11: 793-817.
49. Tang Y, Reed P, van Werkhoven K, Wagener T. 2007b. Advancing the identification and evaluation of distributed rainfall-runoff models using global sensitivity analysis. Water Resource Research 43(6): W06415. DOI:10.1029/2006WR005813.
50. Turanyi T, Rabitz H. 2000. Local methods. In Sensitivity Analysis, Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics, Saltelli A Chan K, Scott EM (eds). John Wiley & Sons: Chichester, UK; 81-89.
51. van Werkhoven K, Wagener T, Reed P, Tang Y. 2008. Characterization of watershed model behavior across a hydroclimatic gradient. Water Resources Research 44: W01429. DOI:10.1029/2007WR006271.
52. Wagener T, Kollat J. 2007. Visual and numerical evaluation of hydrologic and environmental models using the Monte Carlo Analysis Toolbox (MCAT). Environmental Modeling and Software 22: 1021-1033.
53. Wagener T, Boyle DP, Lees MJ, Wheater HS, Gupta HV, Sorooshian S. 2001. A framework for development and application of hydrological models. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences 5(1): 13-26.
54. Wagener T, McIntyre N, Lees MJ, Wheater HS, Gupta HV. 2003. Towards reduced uncertainty in conceptual rainfall-runoff modelling: dynamic identifiability analysis. Hydrological Processes 17: 455-476.
55. White KL, Chaubey I. 2005. Sensitivity analysis, calibration, and validations for a multisite and multivariable SWAT model. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 41(5): 1077-1089.
56. Zhang B, Govindaraju RS. 2000. Prediction of watershed runoff using Bayesian concepts and modular neural networks. Water Resource Research 36(3): 753-762.
57. Zhang X, Srinivasan R, Debele B, Hao F. 2008. Runoff simulation of the headwaters of the Yellow River using the SWAT model with three snowmelt algorithms. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 44(1): 48-61.