Series distance - An intuitive metric to quantify hydrograph similarity in terms of occurrence, amplitude and timing of hydrological events

Hydrology and Earth System Sciences

Volumn 15, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 877-896

  Ehret, U ^a   Zehe, E ^a  

^a KARLSRUHE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DEGREE OF SIMILARITY; HYDROGRAPHS; HYDROLOGICAL EVENTS; HYDROLOGICAL MODELLING; HYDROLOGICAL PROCESS; MATCHING POINTS; MODEL CALIBRATION; MULTI-CRITERIA; OBJECTIVE METRICS; PROCESS-BASED MODELS; RELATIVE POSITIONS; RELATIVE WEIGHTS; ROOT MEAN SQUARE ERRORS; SIMULATED EVENTS; STANDARD METRICS; THREE COMPONENT; TIMING ERRORS; VISUAL EVALUATION; VISUAL INSPECTION;

TIME SERIES;

COMPUTER SIMULATION;

AMPLITUDE; CALIBRATION; HYDROGRAPH; HYDROLOGICAL MODELING; TIME SERIES; VISUAL ANALYSIS;

EID: 79952651299     PISSN: 10275606     EISSN: 16077938     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.5194/hess-15-877-2011     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Bastidas, L. A., Gupta, H. V., Sorooshian, S., Shuttleworth, W. J., and Yang, Z. L.: Sensitivity analysis of a land surface scheme using multicriteria methods, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 104, 19481-19490, 1999.
2. Beldring, S.: Multi-criteria validation of a precipitation-runoff model, J. Hydrol., 257, 189-211, 2002. (Pubitemid 34088490)
3. Boyle, D. P., Gupta, H. V., and Sorooshian, S.: Toward improved calibration of hydrologic models: Combining the strengths of manual and automatic methods, Water Resour. Res., 36, 3663-3674, 2000. (Pubitemid 32039916)
4. Boyle, D. P., Gupta, H. V., Sorooshian, S., Koren, V., Zhang, Z. Y., and Smith, M.: Toward improved streamflow forecasts: Value of semidistributed modeling, Water Resour. Res., 37, 2749-2759, 2001. (Pubitemid 32996668)
5. Casati, B., Wilson, L. J., Stephenson, D. B., Nurmi, P., Ghelli, A., Pocernich, M., Damrath, U., Ebert, E. E., Brown, B. G., and Mason, S.: Forecast verification: Current status and future directions, Meteorol. Appl., 15, 3-18, doi:10.1002/met.52, 2008.
6. Chouakria-Douzal, A. and Nagabhushan, P.: Improved fréchet distance for time series, in: Data science and classification, Studies in classification, data analysis, and knowledge organization, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, Germany, 13-20, 2006.
7. Contreras-Cristán, A., Guti'errez-Peña, E., and Walker, S. G.: A Note on Whittle's Likelihood, Commun. Stat.-Simul. C., 35, 857-875, 2006. (Pubitemid 44603483)
8. Davis, C., Brown, B., and Bullock, R.: Object-based verification of precipitation forecasts, Part i: Methodology and application to mesoscale rain areas, Mon. Weather Rev., 134, 1772-1784, 2006. (Pubitemid 44184524)
9. Dawson, C. W., Abrahart, R. J., and See, L. M.: Hydrotest: A web-based toolbox of evaluation metrics for the standardised assessment of hydrological forecasts, Environ. Modell. Softw., 22, 1034-1052, 2007. (Pubitemid 46209837)
10. Dawson, C. W., Abrahart, R. J., and See, L. M.: Hydro test: Further development of a web resource for the standardised assessment of hydrological models, Environ. Modell. Softw., 25, 1481- 1482, 2010.
11. Donaldson, R. J., Dyer, R. M., and Kraus, M. J.: An objective evaluator of techniques for predicting severe weather events, in: 9th Conf. on Severe Local Storms, Norman, OK, USA, 321-326, 1975.
12. Ebert, E. E.: Fuzzy verification of high-resolution gridded forecasts: A review and proposed framework, Meteorol. Appl., 15, 51-64, doi:10.1002/met.25, 2008.
13. Eiter, T. and Mannila, H.: Computing discrete frechet distance, Christian Doppler Laboratory for Expert Systems, TU Vienna, Austria, 1994.
14. Fenicia, F., Savenije, H. H. G., Matgen, P., and Pfister, L.: Understanding catchment behavior through stepwise model concept improvement, Water Resour. Res., 44, 13, 2008.
15. Frechet, M.: Sur quelques points du calcul fonctionnel, Rendiconto del Circolo Mathematico di Palermo, 22, 1-74, 1906.
16. 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, 751-763, 1998. (Pubitemid 28159454)
17. Gupta, H. V., Wagener, T., and Liu, Y. Q.: Reconciling theory with observations: Elements of a diagnostic approach to model evaluation, Hydrol. Process., 22, 3802-3813, 2008.
18. Gupta, H. V., Kling, H., Yilmaz, K. K., and Martinez, G. F.: Decomposition of the mean squared error and nse performance criteria: Implications for improving hydrological modelling, J. Hydrol., 377, 80-91, 2009.
19. Jain, S. K. and Sudheer, K. P.: Fitting of hydrologic models: A close look at the nash-sutcliffe index, J. Hydrol. Eng., 13, 981-986, 2008.
20. Keil, C. and Craig, G. C.: A displacement and amplitude score employing an optical flow technique, Weather Forecast., 24, 1297-1308, doi:10.1175/2009waf2222247.1, 2009.
21. Krause, P., Boyle, D. P., and Bäse, F.: Comparison of different efficiency criteria for hydrological model assessment, Adv. Geosci., 5, 89-97, 2005, http://www.adv-geosci.net/5/89/2005/. (Pubitemid 44424450)
22. Legates, D. R. and McCabe Jr., G. J.: Evaluating the use of "goodness-of-fit" measures in hydrologic and hydroclimatic model validation, Water Resour. Res., 35, 233-241, 1999. (Pubitemid 29054163)
23. Lerat, J., Anderssen, B., and Gouweleeuw, B.: How to estimate timing errors in flood forecasting systems?, in: Geophys. Res. Abstr., Vol. 12, EGU2010-3832, EGU General Assembly 2010, Vienna, Austria, 2010,
24. Liu, Y., Brown, J., Demargne, J., and Seo, D.-J.: Using wavelet analysis to assess timing errors in streamflow predictions, in: Geophys. Res. Abstr., Vol. 12, EGU2010-5456, EGU General Assembly 2010, Vienna, Austria, 2010,
25. Ludwig, K.: The Program System FGMOD for Calculation of Runoff Processes in River Basins, Z. Kulturtech. Flurber., 23, 25-37, 1982.
26. Ludwig, K. and Bremicker, M.: The water balance model larsim - design, content and applications, Freiburger schriften zur hydrologie, Institut für Hydrologie, Uni Freiburg i. Br., Germany, 2006.
27. Marsigli, C., Boccanera, F., Montani, A., and Paccagnella, T.: The COSMO-LEPS mesoscale ensemble system: validation of the methodology and verification, Nonlin. Processes Geophys., 12, 527-536, doi:10.5194/npg-12-527- 2005, 2005. (Pubitemid 41029981)
28. McCuen, R., Knight, Z., and Cutter, G.: Evaluation of the nashsutcliffe efficiency index, J. Hydrol. Eng., 11, 597-602, 2006.
29. Moeckel, R. and Murray, B.: Measuring the distance between time series, Physica D, 102, 187-194, 1997. (Pubitemid 127701382)
30. Montanari, A. and Toth, E.: Calibration of hydrological models in the spectral domain: An opportunity for scarcely gauged basins?, Water Resour. Res., 43, W05434, doi:10.1029/2006wr005184, 2007. (Pubitemid 46998235)
31. Murphy, A. H.: Skill scores based on the mean-square error and their relationships to the correlation-coefficient, Mon. Weather Rev., 116, 2417-2425, 1988.
32. Muskulus, M. and Verduyn-Lunel, S.: Wasserstein distances in the analysis of time series and dynamical systems, Physica D, 240, 45-58, 2011.
33. Nash, J. E. and Sutcliffe, J. V.: River flow forecasting through conceptual models part i - a discussion of principles, J. Hydrol., 10, 282-290, 1970.
34. Ouyang, R., Ren, L., Cheng, W., and Zhou, C.: Similarity search and pattern discovery in hydrological time series data mining, Hydrol. Process., 24, 1198-1210, doi:10.1002/hyp.7583, 2010.
35. Pappenberger, F. and Beven, K.: Functional classification and evaluation of hydrographs based on multicomponent mapping, Int. J. River Basin Manage., 2, 89-100, 2004.
36. Pebesma, E. J., Switzer, P., and Loague, K.: Error analysis for the evaluation of model performance: Rainfall-runoff event time series data, Hydrol. Process., 19, 1529-1548, 2005. (Pubitemid 40836205)
37. Perng, C.-S., Wang, H., Zhang, S., and Parker, D. S.: Landmarks: A new model for similarity-based pattern querying in time series databases, Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Data Engineering, 33, 2000.
38. Reusser, D. E., Blume, T., Schaefli, B., and Zehe, E.: Analysing the temporal dynamics of model performance for hydrological models, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 13, 999-1018, doi:10.5194/hess-13- 999-2009, 2009.
39. Sakoe, H. and Chiba, S.: Dynamic-programming algorithm optimization for spoken word recognition, IEEE T. Acoust. Speech, 26, 43-49, 1978. (Pubitemid 8601900)
40. Schaefli, B. and Gupta, H. V.: Do nash values have value?, Hydrol. Process., 21, 2075-2080, 2007. (Pubitemid 47098253)
41. Schaefli, B. and Zehe, E.: Hydrological model performance and parameter estimation in the wavelet-domain, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 13, 1921-1936, doi:10.5194/hess-13-1921-2009, 2009.
42. Spate, J., Croke, B., and Jakeman, A.: Data mining in hydrology, MODSIM 2003, Proceedings of the 2003 International Congress on Modelling and Simulation, Townsville, Australia, 2003, 422- 427, 2003.
43. Taylor, K. E.: Summarizing multiple aspects of model performance in a single diagram, J. Geophys. Res., 106, 7183-7192, 2001.
44. van Griensven, A. and Bauwens,W.: Multiobjective autocalibration for semidistributed water quality models,Water Resour. Res., 39, 9, 2003.
45. Weglarczyk, S.: The interdependence and applicability of some statistical quality measures for hydrological models, J. Hydrol., 206, 98-103, 1998. (Pubitemid 28265849)
46. Whittle, P.: Estimation and information in stationary time series, Arkiv för Matematik, 2, 423-434, doi:10.1007/bf02590998, 1953.
47. Winsemius, H. C., Schaefli, B., Montanari, A., and Savenije, H. H. G.: On the calibration of hydrological models in ungauged basins: A framework for integrating hard and soft hydrological information, Water Resour. Res., 45, 15, 2009.
48. Yapo, P. O., Gupta, H. V., and Sorooshian, S.: Multi-objective global optimization for hydrologic models, J. Hydrol., 204, 83-97, 1998.
49. Yilmaz, K. K., Hogue, T. S., Hsu, K. L., Sorooshian, S., Gupta, H. V., and Wagener, T.: Intercomparison of rain gauge, radar, and satellite-based precipitation estimates with emphasis on hydrologic forecasting, J. Hydrometeorol., 6, 497-517, 2005. (Pubitemid 41419776)
50. Yilmaz, K. K., Gupta, H. V., and Wagener, T.: A process-based diagnostic approach to model evaluation: Application to the NWS distributed hydrologic model, Water Resour. Res., 44, W09417, doi:10.1029/2007WR006716, 2008.