Model bias and complexity - Understanding the effects of structural deficits and input errors on runoff predictions

Environmental Modelling and Software

Volumn 64, Issue 1, 2015, Pages 205-214

  Del Giudice, D ^a,b   Reichert, P ^a,b   Bares V ^c   Albert, C ^a   Rieckermann, J ^a  

^a SWISS FEDERAL INSTITUTE OF AQUATIC SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Switzerland)

^b ETH ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^c CZECH TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY IN PRAGUE   (Czech Republic)

Author keywords

Bayesian bias description; Hydrodynamic simulations; Model comparison; Model structural deficits; Rainfall errors; Stochastic uncertainty analysis

Indexed keywords

CATCHMENTS; ERRORS; FORECASTING; RAIN; STOCHASTIC SYSTEMS; SYSTEMATIC ERRORS; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS;

BAYESIAN; ENVIRONMENTAL PREDICTION; HYDRODYNAMIC SIMULATION; MODEL COMPARISON; MODEL UNCERTAINTIES; STOCHASTIC UNCERTAINTIES; SYSTEMATIC DEVIATION; SYSTEMATIC MODELING;

STOCHASTIC MODELS;

ASSESSMENT METHOD; CATCHMENT; DRAINAGE WATER; ERROR ANALYSIS; HYDRODYNAMICS; HYDROLOGICAL MODELING; PREDICTION; RAINFALL-RUNOFF MODELING; STABILIZATION; STOCHASTICITY; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS; URBAN AREA;

EID: 84937157028     PISSN: 13648152     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.envsoft.2014.11.006     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Albert C. Amechanistic dynamic emulator. Nonlinear analysis. Real World Appl. 2012, 13(6):2747-2754.
2. Bareš V., Stránský D., Kopecká J., Fridrich J. Monitoring povodi a stokove sito města Hostivice - lokalita Sadová. [Monitoring a sewer watershed in Hostivice municipality - Sadová district] (in Czech) 2010, Tech. rep, Czech Technical University in Prague.
3. Bayarri M., Berger J., Paulo R., Sacks J., Cafeo J., Cavendish J., Lin C., Tu J. Aframework for validation of computer models. Technometrics 2007, 49(2):138-154.
4. Box G., Cox D. An analysis of transformations. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Ser. B (Methodol.) 1964, 26:211-252.
5. Breinholt A., Møller J., Madsen H., Mikkelsen P. Aformal statistical approach to representing uncertainty in rainfall-runoff modelling with focus on residual analysis and probabilistic output evaluation-distinguishing simulation and prediction. J.Hydrol. 2012, 472-473:36-52.
6. Bulygina N., Gupta H. Estimating the uncertain mathematical structure of a water balance model via Bayesian data assimilation. Water Resour. Res. 2009, 45:W00B13.
7. Butler D., Davies J. Urban Drainage 2010, Spon Press. Third ed.
8. Butts M.B., Payne J.T., Kristensen M., Madsen H. An evaluation of the impact of model structure on hydrological modelling uncertainty for streamflow simulation. J.Hydrol. 2004, 298:242-266.
9. Coutu S., Del Giudice D., Rossi L., Barry D. Parsimonious hydrological modeling of urban sewer and river catchments. J.Hydrol. 2012, 464-465:477-484.
10. Craig P., Goldstein M., Rougier J., Seheult A. Bayesian forecasting for complex systems using computer simulators. J.Am. Stat. Assoc. 2001, 96(454):717-729.
11. Del Giudice D., Honti M., Scheidegger A., Albert C., Reichert P., Rieckermann J. Improving uncertainty estimation in urban hydrological modeling by statistically describing bias. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 2013, 17(10):4209-4225.
12. Dietzel A., Reichert P. Calibration of computationally demanding and structurally uncertain models with an application to a lake water quality model. Environ. Model. Softw. 2012, 38:129-146.
13. Dotto C.B.S., Kleidorfer M., Deletic A., Rauch W., McCarthy D.T., Fletcher T.D. Performance and sensitivity analysis of stormwater models using a Bayesian approach and long-term high resolution data. Environ. Model. Softw. 2011, 26(10):1225-1239.
14. Fenicia F., Kavetski D., Savenije H.H., Clark M.P., Schoups G., Pfister L., Freer J. Catchment properties, function, and conceptual model representation: is there a correspondence?. Hydrol. Process. 2013, 28:2451-2467.
15. Freni G., Mannina G., Viviani G. Urban runoff modelling uncertainty: comparison among Bayesian and pseudo-Bayesian methods. Environ. Model. Softw. 2009, 24(9):1100-1111.
16. Frey M.P., Stamm C., Schneider M.K., Reichert P. Using discharge data to reduce structural deficits in a hydrological model with a Bayesian inference approach and the implications for the prediction of critical source areas. Water Resour. Res. 2011, 47.
17. Gupta H.V., Clark M.P., Vrugt J.A., Abramowitz G., Ye M. Towards a comprehensive assessment of model structural adequacy. Water Resour. Res. 2012, 48(8).
18. Haario H., Saksman E., Tamminen J. An adaptive Metropolis algorithm. Bernoulli 2001, 7(2):223-242.
19. Higdon D., Kennedy M., Cavendish J.C., Cafeo J.A., Ryne R.D. Combining field data and computer simulations for calibration and prediction. SIAM J. Sci. Comput. Feb. 2005, 26(2):448-466.
20. Honti M., Stamm C., Reichert P. Integrated uncertainty assessment of discharge predictions with a statistical error model. Water Resour. Res. 2013, 49:4866-4884.
21. Jackson C.H., Sharples L.D., Thompson S.G. Structural and parameter uncertainty in bayesian cost-effectiveness models. J.R. Stat. Soc. Ser. C (Appl. Stat.) 2010, 59(2):233-253.
22. Johnson S.G. The NLopt nonlinear-optimization package 2014, Accessed and archived at, on 26 April 2014. http://ab-initio.mit.edu/nlopt.
23. Kennedy M., O'Hagan A. Bayesian calibration of computer models. J.R. Stat. Soc. Ser. B (Stat Methodol.) 2001, 63(3):425-464.
24. Leitao J.P., Simoes N.E., Maksimovic C., Ferreira F., Prodanovic D., Matos J.S., Marques A.S. Real-time forecasting urban drainage models: full or simplified networks?. Water Sci. Technol. 2010, 62(9):2106-2114.
25. Leube P.C., De Barros F.P., Nowak W., Rajagopal R. Towards optimal allocation of computer resources: trade-offs between uncertainty quantification, discretization and model reduction. Environ. Model. Softw. 2013, 50:97-107.
26. Lin Z.L., Beck M.B. Accounting for structural error and uncertainty in a model: an approach based on model parameters as stochastic processes. Environ. Model. Softw. 2012, 27-28:97-111.
27. Liu X., Cardiff M., Kitanidis P. Parameter estimation in nonlinear environmental problems. Stoch. Environ. Res. Risk Assess. 2010, 24(7):1003-1022.
28. McLean K.A.P., McAuley K.B. Mathematical modelling of chemical processes - obtaining the best model predictions and parameter estimates using identifiability and estimability procedures. Can. J. Chem. Eng. 2012, 90(2):351-366.
29. McMillan H., Jackson B., Clark M., Kavetski D., Woods R. Rainfall uncertainty in hydrological modelling: an evaluation of multiplicative error models. J.Hydrol. 2011, 400(12):83-94.
30. Metropolis N., Rosenbluth A.W., Rosenbluth M.N., Teller A.H., Teller E. Equation of state calculations by fast computing machines. J.Chem. Phys. 1953, 21(6):1087-1092.
31. Nash J., Sutcliffe J. River flow forecasting through conceptual models part I: a discussion of principles. J.Hydrol. 1970, 10(3):282-290.
32. Neumann M.B., Gujer W. Underestimation of uncertainty in statistical regression of environmental models: influence of model structure uncertainty. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2008, 42(11):4037-4043.
33. R Core Team R: a Language and Environment for Statistical Computing 2013, R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria, accessed and archived at, on 26 April 2014. http://www.R-project.org/.
34. Refsgaard J.C., van der Sluijs J.P., Hojberg A.L., Vanrolleghem P.A. Uncertainty in the environmental modelling process - a framework and guidance. Environ. Model. Softw. 2007, 22(11):1543-1556.
35. Reichert P. Conceptual and Practical Aspects of Quantifying Uncertainty in Environmental Modelling and Decision Support 2012, 1013-1020. 2012 International Congress on Environmental Modelling and Software, International Environmental Modelling and Software Society (iEMSs), archived at. http://www.webcitation.org/6P7w8shw9.
36. Reichert P., Mieleitner J. Analyzing input and structural uncertainty of nonlinear dynamic models with stochastic, time-dependent parameters. Water Resour. Res. 2009, 45(10):W10402.
37. Reichert P., Schuwirth N. Linking statistical bias description to multiobjective model calibration. Water Resour. Res. 2012, 48(9):W09543.
38. Reichert P., White G., Bayarri M.J., Pitman E.B. Mechanism-based emulation of dynamic simulation models: concept and application in hydrology. Comput. Stat. Data Anal. Apr. 2011, 55(4):1638-1655.
39. Renard B., Kavetski D., Leblois E., Thyer M., Kuczera G., Franks S.W. Toward a reliable decomposition of predictive uncertainty in hydrological modeling: characterizing rainfall errors using conditional simulation. Water Resour. Res. 2011, 47(11):W11516.
40. Rossman L., Supply W. Storm Water Management Model User's Manual, Version 5.0 2010, National Risk Management Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency.
41. Salamon P., Feyen L. Disentangling uncertainties in distributed hydrological modeling using multiplicative error models and sequential data assimilation. Water Resour. Res. 2010, 46(12):W12501.
42. Scholten L., Scheidegger A., Reichert P., Maurer M. Combining expert knowledge and local data for improved service life modeling of water supply networks. Environ. Model. Softw. 2013, 42(0):1-16.
43. Schoups G., van de Giesen N.C., Savenije H.H.G. Model complexity control for hydrologic prediction. Water Resour. Res. 2008, 44:W00B03.
44. Sikorska A.E., Scheidegger A., Banasik K., Rieckermann J. Bayesian uncertainty assessment of flood predictions in ungauged urban basins for conceptual rainfall-runoff models. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 2012, 16(4):1221-1236.
45. Sikorska A.E., Scheidegger A., Banasik K., Rieckermann J. Considering rating curve uncertainty in water level predictions. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 2013, 17(11):4415-4427.
46. Spaaks J.H., Bouten W. Resolving structural errors in a spatially distributed hydrologic model using ensemble kalman filter state updates. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 2013, 17(9):3455-3472.
47. Spiegelhalter D.J., Best N.G., Carlin B.P., Van Der Linde A. Bayesian measures of model complexity and fit. J.R. Stat. Soc. Ser. B (Stat. Methodol. 2002, 64(4):583-639.
48. Sun S., Bertrand-Krajewski J.-L. Separately accounting for uncertainties in rainfall and runoff: calibration of event-based conceptual hydrological models in small urban catchments using bayesian method. Water Resour. Res. 2013, 49(9):5381-5394.
49. Vihola M. Robust adaptive metropolis algorithm with coerced acceptance rate. Stat. Comput. 2012, 22(5):997-1008.
50. Vrugt J.A., Robinson B.A. Treatment of uncertainty using ensemble methods: comparison of sequential data assimilation and bayesian model averaging. Water Resour. Res. 2007, 43(1):W01411.
51. Yang J., Reichert P., Abbaspour K.C., Xia J., Yang H. Comparing uncertainty analysis techniques for a SWAT application to the Chaohe basin in China. J.Hydrol. 2008, 358(12):1-23.
52. Yang J., Reichert P., Abbaspour K.C., Yang H. Hydrological modelling of the Chaohe basin in China: statistical model formulation and Bayesian inference. J.Hydrol. 2007, 340(34):167-182.
53. Zhang X., Hoermann G., Gao J., Fohrer N. Structural uncertainty assessment in a discharge simulation model. Hydrol. Sci. J. 2011, 56(5):854-869.