Identifiability analysis: Towards constrained equifinality and reduced uncertainty in a conceptual model;Analyse d’identifiabilité: Vers une équifinalité contrainte et une réduction de l’incertitude en modélisation conceptuelle

Hydrological Sciences Journal

Volumn 59, Issue 9, 2014, Pages 1690-1703

  Muñoz, Enrique ^a   Rivera, Diego ^b   Vergara, Fernando ^a   Tume, Pedro ^a   Arumí, José Luis ^b  

^a UNIVERSIDAD CATÓLICA DE LA SANTÍSIMA CONCEPCIÓN   (Chile)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CONCEPCIÓN   (Chile)

Author keywords

Equifinality; Identifiability analysis; Surface hydrology; Uncertainty; Water balance model

Indexed keywords

HYDROLOGY;

EQUIFINALITY; IDENTIFIABILITY ANALYSIS; SURFACE HYDROLOGY; UNCERTAINTY; WATER BALANCE MODELS;

UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS;

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK; HYDROLOGICAL MODELING; HYDROLOGY; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS; WATER BUDGET;

CHILE;

EID: 84911940822     PISSN: 02626667     EISSN: 21503435     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/02626667.2014.892205     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Bárdossy, A., 2007. Calibration of hydrological model parameters for ungauged catchments. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 11 (2), 703–710. doi:10.5194/hess-11-703-2007.
2. Beven, K., 2006. A manifesto for the equifinality thesis. Journal of Hydrology, 320, 18–36. doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2005.07.007.
3. Beven, K. and Binley, A., 1992. The future of distributed models: model calibration and uncertainty prediction. Hydrological Processes, 6, 279–298. doi:10.1002/hyp.3360060305.
4. Beven, K. and Freer, J., 2001. Equifinality, data assimilation, and uncertainty estimation in mechanistic modelling of complex environmental systems using the GLUE methodology. Journal of Hydrology, 249, 11–29. doi:10.1016/S0022-1694(01)00421-8.
5. Brun, R., Reichert, P., and Künsch, H., 2001. Practical identifiability analysis of large environmental simulation models. Water Resources Research, 37 (4), 1015–1030. doi:10.1029/2000WR900350.
6. Casassa, G., 1995. Glacier inventory in Chile: current status and recent glacier variations. Annals of Glaciology, 21, 317–322.
7. Clark, M.P. and Vrugt, J.A., 2006. Unraveling uncertainties in hydrologic model calibration: addressing the problem of compensatory parameters. Geophysical Research Letters, 33 (6), L06406. doi:10.1029/2005GL025604.
8. Debels, P., et al., 2005. Evaluation of water quality in the Chillán River (Central Chile) using physicochemical parameters and a modified water quality index. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 110, 301–322. doi:10.1007/s10661-005-8064-1.
9. DGA, 1991. Precipitaciones Máximas en 1 2 y 3. Días. Santiago de Chile: Dirección General de Aguas.
10. Figueroa, R., et al., 2007. Análisis comparativo de índices bióticos utilizados en la evaluación de la calidad de las aguas en un río mediterráneo de Chile: río Chillán, VIII Región. Revista Chilena de Historia Natural, 80, 225–242. doi:10.4067/S0716-078X2007000200008.
11. Garreaud, R.D., 2009. The Andes climate and weather. Advances in Geosciences, 22, 3–11. doi:10.5194/adgeo-22-3-2009.
12. Gupta, H.V., et al., 2009. Decomposition of the mean squared error and NSE performance criteria: implications for improving hydrological modelling. Journal of Hydrology, 377, 80–91. doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2009.08.003.
13. Herbst, M., Gupta, H.V., and Casper, M.C., 2009. Mapping model behaviour using self-organizing maps. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 13, 395–409. doi:10.5194/hess-13-395-2009.
14. Hornberger, G.M. and Spear, R.C., 1981. An approach to the preliminary analysis of environmental systems. Journal of Environmental Management, 12, 7–18.
15. Lee, G., Tachikawa, Y., and Takara, K., 2011. Comparison of model structural uncertainty using a multi-objective optimisation method. Hydrological Processes, 25, 2642–2653. doi:10.1002/hyp.8006.
16. Moradkhani, H., et al., 2005. Dual state-parameter estimation of hydrological models using ensemble Kalman filter. Advances in Water Resources, 28 (2), 135–147. doi:10.1016/j.advwatres.2004.09.002.
17. Muñoz, E., 2010. Desarrollo de un modelo hidrológico como herramienta de apoyo para la gestión del agua. Aplicación a la cuenca del Río Laja, Chile. Thesis (Master degree). Universidad de Cantabria.
18. Muñoz, E., et al., 2011. Comparison of gridded and measured rainfall data for basin-scale hydrological studies. Chilean Journal of Agricultural Research, 71 (3), 459–468. doi:10.4067/S0718-58392011000300018.
19. Nash, J. and Sutcliffe, J., 1970. River flow forecasting through conceptual models part I—A discussion of principles. Journal of Hydrology, 10, 282–290. doi:10.1016/0022-1694(70)90255-6.
20. Ortiz, G., Muñoz, E., and Tume, P., 2011. Incerteza en las variables de entrada de un modelo hidrológico conceptual. Efectos sobre la incerteza en las salidas. XX Congreso Chileno de hidráulica, Santiago.
21. Rango, A. and Martinec, J., 1995. Revisiting the degree-day method for snowmelt computations. Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 31, 657–669. doi:10.1111/j.1752-1688.1995.tb03392.x
22. Renard, B., et al., 2010. Understanding predictive uncertainty in hydrologic modeling: the challenge of identifying input and structural errors. Water Resources Research, 46, W05521. doi:10.1029/2009WR008328.
23. Renard, B., et al., 2011. Toward a reliable decomposition of predictive uncertainty in hydrological modeling: characterizing rainfall errors using conditional simulation. Water Resources Research, 47, W11516. doi:10.1029/2011WR010643.
24. Reusser, D.E., Buytaert, W., and Zehe, E., 2011. Temporal dynamics of model parameter sensitivity for computationally expensive models with the Fourier amplitude sensitivity test. Water Resources Research, 47, W07551. doi:10.1029/2010WR009947.
25. Sandoval, M. and Leon, L., 2000. Origen de los suelos volcánicos de la provincia de Ñuble. Ciencia Ahora, 6, 61–65.
26. Sivapalan, M., et al., 2003. IAHS Decade on Predictions in Ungauged Basins (PUB), 2003–2012: shaping an exciting future for the hydrological sciences. Hydrological Sciences Journal, 48 (6), 857–880. doi:10.1623/hysj.48.6.857.51421.
27. Son, K. and Sivapalan, M., 2007. Improving model structure and reducing parameter uncertainty in conceptual water balance models through the use of auxiliary data. Water Resources Research, 43, 1–18. doi:10.1029/2006WR005032.
28. Thiele, R., et al., 1998. Evolución geológico-geomorfológica cuaternaria del tramo superior del valle del río Laja. Revista Geológica de Chile, 25, 229–253. doi:10.4067/S0716-02081998000200007.
29. Thyer, M., et al., 2009. Critical evaluation of parameter consistency and predictive uncertainty in hydrological modeling: a case study using Bayesian total error analysis. Water Resources Research, 45, W00B14. doi:10.1029/2008WR006825.
30. Vrugt, J.A., et al., 2005. Improved treatment of uncertainty in hydrologic modeling: combining the strengths of global optimization and data assimilation. Water Resources Research, 41, W01017. doi:10.1029/2004WR003059.
31. Wagener, T. and Gupta, H., 2005. Model identification for hydrological forecasting under uncertainty. Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment, 19, 378–387. doi:10.1007/s00477-005-0006-5.
32. Wagener, T. and Kollat, J., 2007. Numerical and visual evaluation of hydrological and environmental models using the Monte Carlo analysis toolbox. Environmental Modelling & Software, 22, 1021–1033. doi:10.1016/j.envsoft.2006.06.017.
33. Wagener, T., et al., 2001. A framework for development and application of hydrological models. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 5, 13–26. doi:10.5194/hess-5-13-2001.
34. Wagener, T., et al., 2003. Towards reduced uncertainty in conceptual rainfall-runoff modelling: dynamic identifiability analysis. Hydrological Processes, 17, 455–476. doi:10.1002/hyp.1135.
35. Wagener, T., et al., 2010. The future of hydrology: an evolving science for a changing world. Water Resources Research, 46, W05301. doi:10.1029/2009WR008906.
36. Willmott, C.J. and Matsuura, K., 2009. Terrestrial air temperature and precipitation: monthly and annual time series (1900–2008) (Version 2.01) [online]. Center for Climatic Research, University of Delaware. Available from: http://climate.geog.udel.edu/~climate/[Accessed 4 June 2012].
37. Wriedt, G. and Rode, M., 2006. Investigation of parameter uncertainty and identifiability of the hydrological model WaSiMETH. Advances in Geosciences, 9, 145–150. doi:10.5194/adgeo-9-145-2006.
38. Yilmaz, K., Gupta, H., and Wagener, T., 2008. A process-based diagnostic approach to model evaluation: application to the NWS distributed hydrologic model. Water Resources Research, 44, 1–18. doi:10.1029/2007WR006716.
39. Zúñiga, R., Muñoz, E., and Arumí, J.L., 2012. Estudio de los procesos hidrológicos de la cuenca del Río Diguillín. Obras y Proyectos, 11, 69–78. doi:10.4067/S0718-28132012000100007