Parameter estimation in nonlinear environmental problems

Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment

Volumn 24, Issue 7, 2010, Pages 1003-1022

  Liu, Xiaoyi ^a   Cardiff, Michael A ^a   Kitanidis, Peter K ^a  

^a Stanford University   (United States)

Author keywords

Bayesian method; Markov chain Monte Carlo; Maximum a posteriori estimation; MCMC convergence

Indexed keywords

ADVECTION-DISPERSION EQUATION; APPROXIMATE EVALUATION; BAYESIAN METHODS; BEST ESTIMATES; CONVENTIONAL METHODS; DNAPL SOURCE ZONES; EMPIRICAL EQUATIONS; ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS; ESTIMATION PROBLEM; HIGH-DIMENSIONAL; LEAST SQUARE; MARKOV CHAIN MONTE CARLO; MARKOV CHAIN MONTE CARLO METHOD; MAXIMUM A POSTERIORI; MAXIMUM A POSTERIORI ESTIMATION; MCMC CONVERGENCE; MONTE CARLO; OPTIMIZATION PROBLEMS; PARAMETER ESTIMATION METHOD; PLUME CONCENTRATIONS; POSTERIOR DISTRIBUTIONS; SCOPE OF APPLICATION; SEMI-ANALYTICAL MODEL; SOLUTE TRANSPORT MODEL;

AQUIFERS; BAYESIAN NETWORKS; COVARIANCE MATRIX; DISSOLUTION; MARKOV PROCESSES; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; MAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD ESTIMATION; METAL ANALYSIS; NONLINEAR ANALYSIS; NONLINEAR EQUATIONS; PARAMETER ESTIMATION; SOLUTE TRANSPORT;

MONTE CARLO METHODS;

ADVECTION-DIFFUSION EQUATION; BAYESIAN ANALYSIS; DISSOLUTION; ENVIRONMENTAL RISK; ESTIMATION METHOD; MARKOV CHAIN; MONTE CARLO ANALYSIS; NONLINEARITY; NUMERICAL MODEL; SOLUTE TRANSPORT;

EID: 78249271362     PISSN: 14363240     EISSN: 14363259     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00477-010-0395-y     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Bard Y (June 1973) Nonlinear parameter estimation. Academic Press, London, ISBN 0120782502.
2. Bates BC, Campbell EP (2001) A markov chain Monte carlo scheme for parameter estimation and inference in conceptual rainfall-runoff modeling. Water Resour Res 37(4): 937-947.
3. Blasone RS, Madsen H, Rosbjerg D (2008) Uncertainty assessment of integrated distributed hydrological models using glue with markov chain Monte carlo sampling. J Hydrol 353(1-2): 18-32.
4. Brooks SP, Gelman A (1998) General methods for monitoring convergence of iterative simulations. J Comput Graph Stat 7(4): 434-455.
5. Butler JJ, McElwee CD, Bohling GC (1999) Pumping tests in networks of multilevel sampling wells: motivation and methodology. Water Resour Res 35(11): 3553-3560.
6. Carrera J, Neuman SP (1986) Estimation of aquifer parameters under transient and steady-state conditions. 1. maximum-likelihood method incorporating prior information. Water Resour Res 22(2): 199-210.
7. Chib S, Greenberg E (1995) Understanding the Metropolis-Hastings algorithm. Am Stat 49(4): 327-335.
8. Cowles MK, Carlin BP (1996) Markov chain Monte carlo convergence diagnostics: a comparative review. J Am Stat Assoc 91(434): 883-904.
9. Domenico PA (1987) An analytical model for multidimensional transport of a decaying contaminant species. J Hydrol 91(1-2): 49-58.
10. Dorrie H (1965) 100 Great problems of elementary mathematics, Dover Publications, NY, pp 73-77.
11. Duane S, Kennedy AD, Pendleton BJ, Roweth D (1987) Hybrid Monte carlo. Phys Lett B 195(2): 216-222. doi: 10. 1016/0370-2693(87)91197-X.
12. Feyen L, Vrugt JA, Nuallain BO, van der Knijff J, De Roo A (2007) Parameter optimisation and uncertainty assessment for large-scale streamflow simulation with the lisflood model. J Hydrol 332: 276-289.
13. Fisher AR (1953) The design of experiments, 6th edn. Hafner Pub. Co, NY.
14. Franssen HJH, Gomez-Hernandez J, Sahuquillo A (2003) Coupled inverse modelling of groundwater flow and mass transport and the worth of concentration data. J Hydrol 281(4): 281-295.
15. Franssen HJH, Alcolea A, Riva M, Bakr M, van der Wiel N, Stauffer F, Guadagnini A (2009) A comparison of seven methods for the inverse modelling of groundwater flow. application to the characterisation of well catchments. Adv Water Resour 32(6): 851-872.
16. Frind EO, Pinder GF (1973) Galerkin solution of inverse problem for aquifer transmissivity. Water Resour Res 9(5): 1397-1410.
17. Fu JL, Gomez-Hernandez JJ (2009) Uncertainty assessment and data worth in groundwater flow and mass transport modeling using a blocking markov chain Monte carlo method. J Hydrol 364(3-4): 328-341.
18. Gelman A, Rubin DB (1992) A single series from the gibbs sampler provides a false sense of security. In: Bernardo JM, Berger JO, Dawid AP, Smith AFM (eds) Bayesian statistics, 4th edn. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 625-631.
19. Geman S, Geman D (1984) Stochastic relaxation, gibbs distributions, and the bayesian restoration of images. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 6(6): 721-741.
20. Gilks WR, Roberts GO, George EI (1994) Adaptive direction sampling. Stat 43(1): 179-189.
21. Gill PE, Murray W (1981) Practical optimization. Academic Press, London, pp 113-113.
22. Gomez-Hernandez JJ, Sahuquillo A, Capilla JE (1997) Stochastic simulation of transmissivity fields conditional to both transmissivity and piezometric data-i. theory. J Hydrol 203(1-4): 162-174.
23. Gomez-Hernandez JJ, Franssen HJH, Cassiraga EF (2001) Stochastic analysis of flow response in a three-dimensional fractured rock mass block. International J Rock Mech Mini Sci 38(1): 31-44.
24. Hastings WK (1970) Monte carlo sampling methods using markov chains and their applications. Biometrika 57(1): 97-109. ISSN 00063444.
25. Kentel E, Aral MM (2005) 2D Monte carlo versus 2D fuzzy Monte carlo health risk assessment. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 19(1): 86-96. doi: 10. 1007/s00477-004-0209-1.
26. Kitanidis PK, Lane RW (1985) Maximum-likelihood parameter-estimation of hydrologic spatial processes by the gauss-newton method. J Hydrol 79(1-2): 53-71.
27. Kitanidis PK, Vomvoris EG (1983) A geostatistical approach to the inverse problem in groundwater modeling (steady-state) and one-dimensional simulations. Water Resour Res 19(3): 677-690.
28. Kuczera G, Parent E (1998) Monte carlo assessment of parameter uncertainty in conceptual catchment models: the metropolis algorithm. J Hydrol 211(1-4): 69-85.
29. Lavenue M, de Marsily G (2001) Three-dimensional interference test interpretation in a fractured aquifer using the pilot point inverse method. Water Resour Res 37(11): 2659-2675.
30. Liu JS, Liang FM, Wong WH (2000) The multiple-try method and local optimization in metropolis sampling. J Am Stat Assoc 95(449): 121-134.
31. Liu X, Illman WA, Craig AJ, Zhu J, Yeh TCJ (2007) Laboratory sandbox validation of transient hydraulic tomography. Water Resour Res 43(5): 13. doi: 10. 1029/2006WR005144.
32. Marshall L, Nott D, Sharma A (2004) A comparative study of markov chain Monte carlo methods for conceptual rainfall-runoff modeling. Water Resour Res 40(2). doi: 10. 1029/2003WR002378.
33. Metropolis N, Rosenbluth AW, Rosenbluth MN, Teller AH, Teller E (1953) Equation of state calculations by fast computing machines. J Chem Phys 21(6): 1087-1092. doi: 10. 1063/1. 1699114.
34. Michalak AM (2008) A gibbs sampler for inequality-constrained geostatistical interpolation and inverse modeling. Water Resour Res 44(9)W09437.
35. Michalak AM, Kitanidis PK (2003) A method for enforcing parameter nonnegativity in bayesian inverse problems with an application to contaminant source identification. Water Resour Res 39(2): SBH 7/1-SBH 7/14.
36. Oliver DS, Cunha LB, Reynolds AC (1997) Markov chain Monte carlo methods for conditioning a permeability field to pressure data. Math Geol 29(1): 61-91.
37. Parker JC, Park E (2004) Modeling field-scale dense nonaqueous phase liquid dissolution kinetics in heterogeneous aquifers. Water Resour Res 40(5). doi: 10. 1029/2003WR002807.
38. Parker JC, Park E, Tang G (2008) Dissolved plume attenuation with dnapl source remediation, aqueous decay and volatilization-analytical solution, model calibration and prediction uncertainty. J Contam Hydrol 102(1-2): 61-71. doi: 10. 1016/j. jconhyd. 2008. 03. 009.
39. Ramarao BS, Lavenue AM, Demarsily G, Marietta MG (1995) Pilot point methodology for automated calibration of an ensemble of conditionally simulated transmissivity fields. 1. theory and computational experiments. Water Resour Res 31(3): 475-493.
40. Ritter C, Tanner MA (1992) Facilitating the gibbs sampler - the gibbs stopper and the griddy-gibbs sampler. J Am Stat Assoc 87(419): 861-868.
41. Sahuquillo A, Capilla JE, Gómez-Hernández JJ, Andreu J (1992) Conditional simulation of transmissivity fields honoring piezometric data. In: Blain WR, Cabrera E (eds) Fluid flow modeling, hydraulic engineering software, vol 2 of 4. Elsevier, Oxford, pp 201-214.
42. Smith TJ, Marshall LA (2008) Bayesian methods in hydrologic modeling: a study of recent advancements in markov chain Monte Carlo techniques. Water Resour Res 44. doi: 10. 1029/2007WR006705.
43. van den Bos A (2007) Parameter estimation for scientists and engineers. Wiley-Interscience, Hoboken, NJ, 273 pp. ISBN 0470147814.
44. von Neumann J (1951) Various techniques used in connection with random digits. In: Householder AS, Forsythe GE, Germond HH (eds) Monte Carlo method. National Bureau of Standards Applied Mathematics Series, vol 12. U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, pp 36-38.
45. Vrugt JA, Gupta HV, Bouten W, Sorooshian S (2003) A shuffled complex evolution metropolis algorithm for optimization and uncertainty assessment of hydrologic model parameters. Water Resour Res 39(8) 1.1-1.16.
46. Vrugt JA, ter Braak CJF, Clark MP, Hyman JM, Robinson BA (2008) Treatment of input uncertainty in hydrologic modeling: doing hydrology backward with markov chain Monte carlo simulation. Water Resour Res 44. doi: 10. 1029/2007WR006720.
47. Vrugt JA, ter Braak CJF, Gupta HV, Robinson BA (2009) Equifinality of formal (DREAM) and informal (GLUE) bayesian approaches in hydrologic modeling? Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 23(7): 1011-1026. doi: 10. 1007/s00477-008-0274-y.
48. Yeh TCJ, Liu SY (2000) Hydraulic tomography: development of a new aquifer test method. Water Resour Res 36(8)2095-2105.