C-SWAT: The Soil and Water Assessment Tool with consolidated input files in alleviating computational burden of recursive simulations

Computers and Geosciences

Volumn 72, Issue , 2014, Pages 221-232

  Yen, Haw ^a,c   Ahmadi, Mehdi ^b   White, Michael J ^c   Wang, Xiuying ^a   Arnold, Jeffrey G ^c  

^a BLACKLAND RESEARCH AND EXTENSION CENTER   (United States)

^b TEXAS A AND M UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE   (United States)

Author keywords

Auto calibration; Consolidated inputs; Parallel processing; Shuffled complex evolution; SWAT

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHMS; INPUT OUTPUT PROGRAMS; PARALLEL ARCHITECTURES; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS; WATER QUALITY;

AUTO CALIBRATION; CONSOLIDATED INPUTS; PARALLEL PROCESSING; SHUFFLED COMPLEX EVOLUTION; SWAT;

CALIBRATION;

ALGORITHM; CALIBRATION; HYDROLOGICAL MODELING; OPTIMIZATION; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS; WATER QUALITY; COMPUTER SIMULATION; NUMERICAL MODEL; PARALLEL COMPUTING; RIVER BASIN;

LITTLE WASHITA BASIN; OKLAHOMA [UNITED STATES]; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84907313772     PISSN: 00983004     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cageo.2014.07.017     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Ahmadi M., Ascough J.C., DeJonge K.C., Arabi M. Multisite-multivariable sensitivity analysis of distributed watershed models: enhancing the perceptions from computationally frugal methods. Ecol. Model. 2014, 279:54-67.
2. Arnold J.G., Allen P.M., Bernhardt G. A comprehensive surface-groundwater flow model. J. Hydrol. 1993, 142:47-69.
3. Arnold, J.G., Kiniry, J.R., Srinivasan, R., Williams, J.R., Haney, E.B., Neitsch, S.L., 2011. Soil and Water Assessment Tool Input/Output File Documentation Version 2009. Texas Water Resources Institute Technical Report No. 365, Texas A&M University System.
4. Arnold J.G., Moriasi D.N., Gassman P.W., Abbaspour K.C., White M.J., Srinivasan R., Santhi C., Harmel R.D., Griensven A.V., Van Liew M.W., Kannon N., Jha M.K. SWAT: model use, calibration, and validation. Trans. ASABE 2012, 55:1491-1508.
5. ASCE Criteria for evaluation of watershed models, ASCE task committee on definition of criteria for evaluation of watershed models of the watershed management, irrigation, and drainage division. J. Irrig. Drain. Eng. 1993, 119:429.
6. Brown L.C., Barnwell T.O. The enhanced stream water quality models QUAL2E and QUAL2E-UNCAS: documentation and user manual. Environmental Research Laboratory. US EPA, EPA /600/3-87/007, Athens, GA 1987, 189.
7. Borah D.K., Yagow G., Saleh A., Barnes P.L., Rosenthal W., Krug E.C., Hauck L.M. Sediment and nutrient modeling for TMDL development and implementation. Trans. ASABE 2006, 49:967-986.
8. Bosch N.S., Allan J.D., Dolan D.M., Han H., Richards R.P. Application of the Soil and Water Assessment Tool for six watersheds of Lake Erie: model parameterization and calibration. J. Great Lakes Res. 2011, 37:263-271.
9. Brazier R.E., Beven K.J., Freer J., Rowan J.S. Equifinality and uncertainty in physically based soil erosion models: application of the glue methodology to WEPP-the water erosion prediction project- for sites in the UK and USA. Earth Surf. Process. Landforms 2000, 25:825-845.
10. Chiang L., Chaubey I., Gitau M.W., Arnold J.G. Differentiating impacts of land use changes from pasture management in a CEAP watershed using the SWAT model. Trans. ASABE 2010, 53:1569-1584.
11. Daggupati P., Douglas-Mankin K.R., Sheshukov A.Y., Barnes P.L., Devlin D.L. Field-level targeting using SWAT: mapping output from HRUs to fields and assessing limitations of GIS input data. Trans. ASBE 2011, 54(2):501-514.
12. Duan Q., Sorooshian S., Gupta V. Effective and efficient global optimization for conceptual rainfall-runoff models. Water Resour. Res. 1992, 28:1015-1031.
13. Duan Q., Sorooshian S., Gupta V.K. Optimal use of the SCE-UA global optimization method for calibrating watershed models. J. Hydrol. 1994, 158:265-284.
14. Duriancik L.F., Bucks D., Dobrowolski J.P., Drewes T., Eckles S.D., Jolley L., Kellogg R.L., Lund D., Makuch J.R., O'Neill M.P., Rewa C.A., Walbridge M.R., Parry R., Weltz M.A. The first five years of the Conservation Effects Assessment Project. J. Soil Water Conserv. 2008, 63(6):185A-197A.
15. Freer J.E., McMillan H., McDonnell J.J., Beven K.J. Constraining dynamic TOPMODEL responses for imprecise water table information using fuzzy rule based performance measures. J. Hydrol. 2004, 291:254-277.
16. Harmel R.D., Smith P.K., Migliaccio K.W. Modifying goodness-of-fit in indicators to incorporate both measurement and model uncertainty in calibration and validation. Trans. ASABE 2010, 53:55-63.
17. Hoque Y.M., Tripathi S., Hantush M.M., Govindaraju R.S. Watershed reliability, resilience and vulnerability analysis under uncertainty using water quality data. J. Environ. Manag. 2012, 109:101-112. 10.1016/j/jenvman.2012.05.010.
18. Johnson A. A Regression Metamodel to Replace SWAT in Crop Yield Prediction for Big Creek Watershed 2013, (Master thesis), Southern Illinois University.
19. Joseph J.F., Guillaume J.H.A. Using a parallelized MCMC algorithm in R to identify appropriate likelihood functions for SWAT. Environ. Model. Softw 2013, 46:292-298.
20. Liew M.W.Van, Veith T.L., Bosch D.D., Arnold J.G. Suitability of SWAT for the Conservation Effects Assessment Project: Comparison on USDA Agricultural Research Service Watersheds. J. Hydrol. Eng. 2007, 173-189.
21. Mathworks, T., 2013. MATLAB 2013b. Natick, MA. Available at. http://www.mathworks.com.
22. Moriasi D.N., Wilson B.N., Douglas-Mankin K.R., Arnold J.G., Gowda P.H. Hydrologic and water quality models: use, calibration. Trans. ASABE 2012, 55:1241-1247.
23. Nash J.E., Sutcliffe J.V. River flow forecasting through conceptual models: part I. A discussion of principles. J. Hydrol. 1970, 10(3):282-290.
24. Osorio J., Jeong J., Arnold J.G., Beiger B. Influence of potential evapotranspiration on the water balance of sugarcane fields in Maui, Hawaii - special issue: evapotranspiration. J. Water Res. Prot. 2014, 6:852-868.
25. Neitsch, S.L., Arnold, J.G., Kiniry, J.R., R, W.J., 2011. Soil & Water Assessment Tool Theoretical Documentation Version 2009. Texas Water Resource Institute Technical Report No. 406, Texas A&M University System.
26. USDA NASS, 2012. USDA-National Agricultural Statistics Service, Cropland Data Layer.
27. USDA NRCS, 2009. Conservation Effects Assessment Project (CEAP). USDA National Resources Conservation Service. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/technical/NRI/ceap/.
28. USDA NRCS, 2012. Soil Data Mart, Washington D.C., Available online. http://soildatamart.nrcs.usda.gov.
29. Pagliero L., Bouraoui F., Willems P., Diels J. Large-scale hydrological simulations using the Soil Water Assessment Tool, protocol development, and application in the Danube Basin. J. Environ. Qual 2012, 43(1):145-154.
30. Rouholahnejad E., Abbaspour K.C., Vejdani M., Srinivasan R., Schulin R., Lehmann A. A parallelization framework for calibration of hydrological models. Environ. Model. Softw. 2012, 31:28-36.
31. Schuol J., Abbaspour K.C., Srinivasan R., Yang H. Estimation of freshwater availability in the West African sub-continent using the SWAT hydrologic model. J. Hydrol. 2008, 352:30-49.
32. Seo M., Yen H., Jeong J. Transferability of input parameters between SWAT 2009 and SWAT 2012. J. Environ. Qual. 2014, 43(3):869-880. 10.2134/jeq2013.11.0450.
33. Servat E., Dezetter A. Selection of calibration objective functions in the context of rainfall-runoff modeling in a Sudanese savannah area. Hydrol. Sci. J 1991, 36:307-330.
34. Sharma, V., Swayne, D.A., Lam, D., Schertzer, W., 2006. Parallel Shuffled Complex Evolution Algorithm for calibration of hydrological models. In: Proceedings of the 20th International Symposium on High-Performance Computing in an Advanced Collaborative Environment (HPCS[U+05F3]06), IEEE.
35. Tolson B.A., Shoemaker C.A. Dynamically dimensioned search algorithm for computationally efficient watershed model calibration. Water Resour. Res. 2007, 43:1-16.
36. USGS NED, 2013. 1/3″ Digital Elevation Model. URL (accessed May 2013). http://seamless.usgs.gov/.
37. Vrugt J.A., Braak C.J.F., Diks C.G.H., Robinson B.A., Hyman J.M., Higdon D. Accelerating Markov Chain Monte Carlo Simulation by differential evolution with self-adaptive randomized subspace sampling. Int. J. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul. 2009, 10:271-288.
38. White M.J., Harmel R.D., Arnold J.G., Williams J.R. SWAT check: A screening tool to assist users in the identification of potential model application problems. J. Environ. Qual. 2014, 43:208-214. 10.2134/jeq2012.0039.
39. Winchell M., Srinivasan R., Di Luzio M., Arnold J.G. ArcSWAT 2.1 Interface for SWAT 2005: User's Guide 2008, Blackland Research Center, Temple, Texas.
40. Whittaker G. Use of a Beowulf cluster for estimation of risk using SWAT. Agron. J. 2004, 96:1495-1497.
41. Yalew S., van Griensven A., Ray N., Kokoszkiewicz L., Betrie G.D. Distributed computation of large scale SWAT models on the grid. Environ. Model. Softw. 2013, 41:223-230.
42. Yen H. Confronting input, parameter, structural, and measurement uncertainty in multi-site multiple responses watershed modeling using Bayesian inferences 2012, (Ph.D. Dissertation), Colorado State University.
43. Yen H., Wang X., Fontane D.G., Harmel R.D., Arabi M. A framework for propagation of uncertainty contributed by parameterization, input data, model structure, and calibration/validation data in watershed modeling. Environ. Model. Softw. 2014, 54:211-221.
44. Yen H., Bailey R.T., Arabi M., Ahmadi M., White M.J., Arnold J.G. The Role of interior watershed processes in Improving parameter estimation and performance of watershed models. J. Environ. Qual. 2014, 10.2134/jeq2013.03.0110.
45. Zhang X., Beeson P., Link R., Manowitz D., Izaurralde R.C., Sadeghi A., Thomson A.M., Sahajpal R., Srinivasan R., Arnold J.G. Efficient multi-objective calibration of a computationally intensive hydrologic model with parallel computing software in Python. Environ. Model. Softw. 2013, 46:208-218.
46. Zhang X., Srinivasan R., Bosch D. Calibration and uncertainty analysis of the SWAT model using Genetic Algorithms and Bayesian Model Averaging. J. Hydrol. 2009, 374:307-317.