Causal models as multiple working hypotheses about environmental processes

Comptes Rendus - Geoscience

Volumn 344, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 77-88

  Beven, Keith ^a,b,c,d  

^a LANCASTER UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b UPPSALA UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^c LONDON SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS   (United Kingdom)

^d EPFL   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Critical experiments; Environmental prediction; Epistemic uncertainties; Limits of acceptability; Model evaluation; Modelling philosophy

Indexed keywords

BOUNDARY CONDITION; ENVIRONMENTAL MODELING; EXPERIMENTAL STUDY; HYPOTHESIS TESTING; PHILOSOPHY; PREDICTION; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS;

EID: 84858863142     PISSN: 16310713     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.crte.2012.01.005     Document Type: Article

References (93)

1. Anderson M.P., Woessner W.W. The role of the post-audit in model validation. Adv. Water Resour. 1992, 15:167-174.
2. Andréassian V., Perrin C., Parent E., Bárdossy A. Editorial-The court of miracles of hydrology: can failure stories contribute to hydrological science?. Hydrol. Sci. J. 2010, 55(6):849-856.
3. Bayes T. An essay towards solving a problem in the doctrine of chances. Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. Lond. 1763, 53:370-418.
4. Beven K.J. Changing ideas in hydrology: the case of physically-based models. J. Hydrol. 1989, 105:157-172.
5. Beven K.J. Prophecy, reality and uncertainty in distributed hydrological modelling. Adv. Water Resour. 1993, 16:41-51.
6. Beven K.J Uniqueness of place and process representations in hydrological modelling. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 2000, 4:203-213.
7. Beven K.J. Towards a coherent philosophy for environmental modelling. Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. 2002, A460(458):2465-2484.
8. Beven K.J. Towards an alternative blueprint for a physically-based digitally simulated hydrologic response modelling system. Hydrol. Process. 2002, 16:189-206.
9. Beven K.J. On the concept of model structural error. Water Sci. Technol. 2005, 52:165-175.
10. Beven K.J. A manifesto for the equifinality thesis. J. Hydrol. 2006, 320:18-36.
11. Beven K.J. The Holy Grail of scientific hydrology: Qt=H(SR)A as closure. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 2006, 10:609-618.
12. Beven K.J. Environmental modelling: an uncertain future? 2009, Routledge, London.
13. Beven K.J. Preferential flows and travel time distributions: defining adequate hypothesis tests for hydrological process models. Hydrol. Process. 2010, 24:1537-1547.
14. Beven K.J. I believe in climate change but how precautionary do we need to be in planning for the future?. Hydrol. Process. 2011, 25:1517-1520. 10.1002/hyp.7939.
15. Beven K.J. Rainfall-runoff modelling -the primer 2012, Wiley-Blackwell, Chichester. 2nd edition.
16. Beven K.J., Binley A.M. The future of distributed models: model calibration and uncertainty prediction. Hydrol. Process. 1992, 6:279-298.
17. Beven K.J., Freer J. Equifinality, data assimilation, and uncertainty estimation in mechanistic modelling of complex environmental systems. J. Hydrol. 2001, 249:11-29.
18. Beven K.J., Westerberg I. On red herrings and real herrings: disinformation and information in hydrol. inference. Hydrol. Process. 2011, 25:1676-1680. 10.1002/hyp.7963.
19. Beven K.J., Musy A., Higy C. Tribune libre: l'unicité de lieu, d'action et de temps. Rev. Sci. Eau 2002, 14:525-533.
20. Beven K.J, Smith P.J., Freer J. So just why would a modeller choose to be incoherent?. J. Hydrol. 2008, 354:15-32.
21. Beven K., Smith P.J., Wood A. On the colour and spin of epistemic error (and what we might do about it). Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 2011, 15(2011):3123-3133. 10.5194/hess-15-3123-2011.
22. Beven K.J., Buytaert W., Smith L.A. On virtual observatories and modeled realities (or why discharge must be treated as a virtual variable). Hydrol. Process. 2012, 10.1002/hyp.9261.
23. Blazkova S., Beven K.J., Tacheci P., Kulasova A. Testing the distributed water table predictions of TOPMODEL (allowing for uncertainty in model calibration): the death of TOPMODEL?. Water Resour. Res. 2002, 38:W01257. 10.1029/2001WR000912.
24. Cartwright N. The dappled world: a study of the boundaries of science 1999, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
25. Clark J.S. Why environmental scientists are becoming Bayesians. Ecol. Lett. 2006, 8:2-14.
26. Clark M.P., Slater A.G., Rupp D.E., Woods R.A., Vrugt J.A., Gupta H.V., Wagener T., Hay L.E. Framework for Understanding Structural Errors (FUSE): a modular framework to diagnose differences between hydrological models. Water Resour. Res. 2008, 44:W00B02. 10.1029/2007WR006735.
27. De Marsily G. Tribune libre: quelques réflexions sur l'utilisation des modèles en hydrologie. Rev. Sci. Eau 1994, 7:219-234.
28. De Vito S. A gruesome problem for the curve-fitting solution. Brit. J. Phil. Sci. 1997, 48:391-396.
29. Dean S., Freer J.E., Beven K.J., Wade A.J., Butterfield D. Uncertainty assessment of a process-based integrated catchment model of phosphorus (INCA-P). Stochastic Environ. Res. Risk Assess. 2009, 23:991-1010. 10.1007/s00477-008-0273-z.
30. Dowe D.L., Gardner S., Oppy G. Bayes not bust! Why simplicity is no problem for Bayesians. Brit. J. Phil. Sci. 2007, 58:709-754.
31. Engeland K., Xu C.Y., Gottschalk L. Assessing uncertainties in a conceptual water balance model using Bayesian methodology. J. Hydrol. 2005, 50:45-63.
32. Fenicia F., Savenije H.H.G., Matgen P., Pfister L. Understanding catchment behavior through model concept improvement. Water Resour. Res. 2008, 44:W01402. 10.1029/2006WR005563.
33. Forster M. Bayes and Bust: simplicity as a problem for a probabilist's approach to confirmation. Brit. J. Phil. Sci. 1995, 46:399-424.
34. Forster M., Sober E. How to tell when simpler, more unified, or less ad hoc theories will provide more accurate predictions. Brit. J. Phil. Sci. 1994, 45:1-35.
35. Freer J.E., McMillan H., McDonnell J.J., Beven K.J. Constraining TOPMODEL responses for imprecise water table information using fuzzy rule based performance measures. J. Hydrol. 2004, 291:254-277.
36. Freeze R.A., Harlan R.L. Blueprint for a physically-based, digitally simulated, hydrologic response model. J. Hydrol. 1969, 9:237-258.
37. Ganoulis J. Tribune libre: sur la modélisation des phénomènes hydrologiques. Rev. Sci. Eau 1996, 9:421-434.
38. Goldstein M., Rougier J. Bayes linear calibrated prediction for complex systems. J. Amer. Stat. Assoc. 2006, 101:1132-1143.
39. Groff R. Critical realism, post-positivism and the possibility of knowledge 2004, Routledge, London.
40. Hitchcock C., Sober E. Prediction vs. accommodation and the risk of overfitting. Brit. J. Phil. Sci. 2004, 55:1-34.
41. Howson C. Hume's problem: induction and the justification of belief 2003, Clarendon Press, Oxford.
42. Howson C., Urbach P. Scientific reasoning: the Bayesian approach 1993, Open Court, Chicago. 2nd edition.
43. Iorgulescu I., Beven K.J., Musy A. Flow, mixing, and displacement in using a data-based hydrochemical model to predict conservative tracer data. Water Resour. Res. 2007, 43:W03401. 10.1029/2005WR004019.
44. Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Summary for Policy Makers, WMO: Geneva, 2007.
45. Kennedy M.C., O'Hagan A. Bayesian calibration of mathematical models. J. Roy. Statist. Soc. 2001, D63:425-450.
46. Klemeš V. Operational testing of hydrologic simulation models. J. Hydrol. 1986, 31:13-24.
47. Konikow L.F., Bredehoeft J.D. Groundwater models cannot be validated?. Adv. Water Resour. 1992, 15:75-83.
48. Koutsoyiannis D. Hurst-Kolmogorov dynamics and uncertainty. J. Amer. Water Resour. Assoc. 2011, 47:481-495. 10.1111/j.1752-1688.2011.00543.x.
49. Krueger T., Freer J., Quinton J.N., Macleod C.J.A., Bilotta G.S., Brazier R.E., Butler P., Haygarth P.M. Ensemble evaluation of hydrological model hypotheses. Water Resour. Res. 2010, 46:W07516. 10.1029/2009WR007845.
50. Lamb R., Beven K.J., Myrabø S. Use of spatially distributed water table observations to constrain uncertainty in a rainfall-runoff model. Adv. Water Resour. 1998, 22:305-317.
51. Lawry J. Modelling and reasoning with vague concepts 2006, Springer, Berlin.
52. Lawry J. Appropriateness measures: an uncertainty model for vague concepts. Synthese 2008, 161:255-269. 10.1007/s11229-007-9158-9.
53. Le Moine N., Andréassian V., Perrin C., Michel C. How can rainfall-runoff models handle intercatchment groundwater flows? Theoretical study over 1040 French catchments. Water Resour. Res. 2007, 43:W06428. 10.1029/2006WR005608.
54. Liu Y., Freer J.E., Beven K.J., Matgen P. Towards a limit of acceptability approach to the calibration of hydrological models: extending observation error. J. Hydrol. 2009, 367:93-103. 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2009.01.016.
55. Manning R. On the flow of water in open channel and pipes. Trans. Instn. Civ. Engrs. Ireland 1891, 20:161-207.
56. Mathevet T., Garçon R. Tall tales from the hydrological crypt: are models monsters?. Hydrol. Sci. J. 2010, 55:857-871.
57. Mikkelson G.M. Realism versus instrumentalism in a new statistical framework. Philos. Sci. 2006, 73:440-447.
58. Morton A. Mathematical models: questions of trustworthiness. Brit. J. Phil. Sci. 1993, 44:659-674.
59. Murphy J.M., Booth B.B.B., Collins M., Harris G.R., Sexton D.M.H.R., Webb M.J. A methodology for probabilistic prediction of regional climate change from perturbed physiscs ensembles. Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. Lond. 2007, A365:1993-2008.
60. Niiniluoto I. Truthlikeness 1987, D. Reidel, Dordrecht.
61. Niiniluoto I. Verisimilitude: the third period. Brit. J. Phil. Sci 1998, 49:1-29.
62. O'Hagan A., Oakley J.E. Probability is perfect but we can't elicit it perfectly. Reliability Eng. Syst. Safety 2004, 85:239-248.
63. Oreskes N., Schrader-Frechette K., Belitz K. Verification, validation and confirmation of numerical models in the earth sciences. Science 1994, 263:641-646.
64. Page T., Beven K.J., Freer J. Modelling the chloride signal at the Plynlimon catchments, Wales using a modified dynamic TOPMODEL. Hydrol. Process. 2007, 21:292-307.
65. Pappenberger F., Frodsham K., Beven K.J., Romanovicz R., Matgen P. Fuzzy set approach to calibrating distributed flood inundation models using remote sensing observations. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 2007, 11:739-752.
66. Philip J.R Field heterogeneity: some basic issues. Water Resour. Res. 1980, 16:443-448.
67. Press S.J., Tanur J.M. The subjectivity of scientists and the Bayesian approach 2001, Wiley, Chichester.
68. Refsgaard J.C. Parameterisation, calibration and validation of distributed hydrological models. J. Hydrol. 1997, 198:69-97.
69. Refsgaard J.C., Henriksen H.J. Modelling guidelines-terminology and guiding principles. Adv. Water Resour. 2004, 27:71-82.
70. Reggiani P., Sivapalan M., Hassanizadeh S.M. A unifying framework of watershed thermodynamics: balance equations for mass, momentum, energy and entropy and the second law of thermodynamics. Adv. Water Resour. 1998, 22:367-398.
71. Reggiani P., Sivapalan M., Hassanizadeh S.M., Gray W.G. A unifying framework of watershed thermodynamics: constitutive relationships. Adv. Water Resour. 1999, 23:15-39.
72. Reggiani P., Sivapalan M., Hassanizadeh S.M. Conservation equations governing hillslope responses: physical basis of water balance. Water Resour. Res. 2000, 38:1845-1863.
73. Richards L.A. Capillary conduction of liquids through porous mediums. Physics 1931, 1:313-333.
74. Rougier J.C., Sexton D.M.H.R. Inference in ensemble experiments. Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. Lond. 2007, A365:2133-2144.
75. Santer B.D., Wigley T.M.L., Taylor K.E. The reproducibility of observational estimates of surface and atmospheric temperature change. Science 2011, 334. 10.1126/science.1216273.
76. Schertzer D., Tchiguirinskaia I., Lovejoy S., Hubert P. No monsters, no miracles: in nonlinear sciences hydrology is not an outlier!. Hydrol. Sci. J. 2010, 55:965-979.
77. Sober E. Instrumentalism revisited. Critica 1999, 31:3-38.
78. Sober E. Instrumentalism, parsimony, and the Akaike framework. Philos. Sci. 2002, 69:S112-S123.
79. Stephenson G.R., Freeze R.A. Mathematical simulation of subsurface flow contributions to snowmelt runoff, Reynolds Creek, Idaho. Water Resour. Res. 1974, 10:284-298.
80. Taleb N.N. The Black Swan 2010, Penguin, London. Second Edition.
81. Tarantola A. Inverse problem theory and model parameter estimation 2005, SIAM, Philadelphia, PA.
82. Tarantola A. Popper, Bayes and the inverse problem. Nature Physics 2006, 2:492-494.
83. Taylor B., Models Truth and realism 2006, OUP, Oxford, UK.
84. Von Bertalanffy L. General Systems Theory 1968, Braziller, New York.
85. Wagener T., Wheater H., Gupta H.V. Rainfall-runoff modelling in gauged and ungauged catchments 2004, Imperial College Press, London.
86. Weinberg A. Trans-science. Minerva 1972, 10:209-222.
87. Westerberg I., Guerrero J.L., Seibert J., Beven K.J., Halldin S. Stage-discharge uncertainty derived with a non-stationary rating curve in the Choluteca River, Honduras. Hydrol. Process. 2011, 25:603-613. 10.1002/hyp.7848.
88. Young P.C. Data-based mechanistic modelling of environmental, ecological, economic and engineering systems. Environ. Model. Softw. 1998, 13:105-122.
89. Young P.C. Data-based mechanistic modelling and validation of rainfall-flow models. Model validation: perspectives in hydrological science 2001, 117-161. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, UK. M.G. Anderson, P.D. Bates (Eds.).
90. Young P.C. Top-down and data-based mechanistic modeling of rainfall-flow dynamics at the catchment scale. Hydrol. Process. 2003, 17:2195-2217.
91. Young P.C. Recursive estimation and time-series analysis 2011, Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
92. Young P.C., Beven K.J. Data-based mechanistic modelling and the rainfall-flow nonlinearity. Environmetrics 1994, 5(3):335-363.
93. Young P.C., Ratto M. A unified approach to environmental systems modeling. Stochast. Environ. Res. Risk Assess. 2009, 23:1037-1057.