Fast mechanism-based emulator of a slow urban hydrodynamic drainage simulator

Environmental Modelling and Software

Volumn 78, Issue , 2016, Pages 54-67

  Machac, David ^a,b   Reichert, Peter ^a,b   Rieckermann, Jörg ^a   Albert, Carlo ^a  

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

^b ETH ZURICH   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Emulation; Gaussian process; Hydrological models; Surrogate modelling

Indexed keywords

GAUSSIAN DISTRIBUTION; GAUSSIAN NOISE (ELECTRONIC); RESERVOIRS (WATER); STOCHASTIC SYSTEMS;

DATA-DRIVEN METHODS; EMULATION; GAUSSIAN PROCESSES; HYDROLOGICAL MODELS; INTERPOLATION ERROR; ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE; STOCHASTIC APPROXIMATIONS; SURROGATE MODELLING;

SIMULATORS;

ACCURACY ASSESSMENT; GAUSSIAN METHOD; HYDROLOGICAL MODELING; SIMULATOR; SURROGATE METHOD; URBAN DRAINAGE;

EID: 84953271788     PISSN: 13648152     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.envsoft.2015.12.007     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Albert C. A mechanistic dynamic emulator. Nonlinear Anal. Real World Appl. 2012, 13(6):2747-2754.
2. Anderson E., Bai Z., Bischof C., Blackford S., Demmel J., Dongarra J., Du Croz J., Greenbaum A., Hammarling S., McKenney A., Sorensen D. LAPACK Users' Guide 1999, Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia, PA. third ed.
3. Asher M., Croke B., Jakeman A., Peeters L. A review of surrogate models and their application to groundwater modeling. Water Resour. Res. 2015, 51(8):5957-5973.
4. Axworthy D.H., Karney B.W. Modeling surface and subsurface runoff in a forested watershed. J. Hydrol. Eng. 1999, 4(2):165-173.
5. Bayarri M.J., Berger J.O., Cafeo J., Garcia-Donato G., Liu F., Palomo J., Parthasarathy R.J., Paulo R., Sacks J., Walsh D. Computer model validation with functional output. Ann. Stat. 2007, 35(5):1874-1906.
6. Bellman R. Dynamic programming and lagrange multipliers. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 1956, 42(10):767.
7. Bhattacharya S. A simulation approach to Bayesian emulation of complex dynamic computer models. Bayesian Anal. 2007, 2(4):783-816.
8. Castelletti A., Galelli S., Ratto M., Soncini-Sessa R., Young P. A general framework for dynamic emulation modelling in environmental problems. Environ. Model. Softw. 2012, 34(0):5-18.
9. Conti S., Gosling J.P., Oakley J.E., O'Hagan A. Gaussian process emulation of dynamic computer codes. Biometrika Jun. 2009, 96(3):663-676.
10. Cressie N. The origins of kriging. Math. Geol. 1990, 22(3):239-252.
11. Dalbey K., Patra A., Pitman E., Bursik M., Sheridan M. Input uncertainty propagation methods and hazard mapping of geophysical mass flows. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth (1978-2012) 2008, 113(B5).
12. Dobler C., Pappenberger F. Global sensitivity analyses for a complex hydrological model applied in an alpine watershed. Hydrol. Process. 2013, 27(26):3922-3940.
13. Dongarra J., Faverge M., Ltaief H., Luszczek P. Achieving numerical accuracy and high performance using recursive tile lu factorization with partial pivoting. Concurrency Comput. Pract. Exp. 2014, 26(7):1408-1431.
14. Forrester A.I., Bressloff N.W., Keane A.J. Optimization using surrogate models and partially converged computational fluid dynamics simulations. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London a: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences 2006, vol. 462:2177-2204. The Royal Society.
15. Forrester A.I., Sóbester A., Keane A.J. Multi-fidelity optimization via surrogate modelling. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London a: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences 2007, vol. 463:3251-3269. The Royal Society.
16. Fu R. The Effect of Different Rainfall Information on Sewer Flow Predictions 2013, Master's thesis, ETH Zurich.
17. Giustolisi O., Laucelli D. Improving generalization of artificial neural networks in rainfallrunoff modelling. Hydrological Sci. J. 2005, 50(3).
18. Goffe W.L., Ferrier G.D., Rogers J. Simann: Fortran Module to Perform Global Optimization of Statistical Functions with Simulated Annealing 1992.
19. Gramacy R.B., Lian H. Gaussian process single-index models as emulators for computer experiments. Technometrics 2012, 54(1):30-41.
20. Gugercin S., Antoulas A.C. A survey of model reduction by balanced truncation and some new results. Int. J. Control 2004, 77(8):748-766.
21. Haag I. A basic water quality model for the river neckar: part 1-model development, parameter sensitivity and identifiability, calibration and validation. Acta Hydrochim. Hydrobiol. 2006, 34(6):533-548.
22. Higdon D., Gattiker J., Williams B., Rightley M. Computer model calibration using high-dimensional output. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 2008, 103(482).
23. Huber W., of Guelph School of Engineering, U., Dickinson R., Aldrich J., Roesner L., Barnwell T., Laboratory, E.R., Laboratory, C.E.R., EPA, U. The USEPA SWMM4 Stormwater Management Model: Version 4 User's Manual 1988, University of Guelph, School of Engineering, URL. http://books.google.ch/books?id=8UewnQEACAAJ.
24. Kennedy M.C., O'Hagan A. Bayesian calibration of computer models. J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. B Stat. Methodol. 2001, 63(3):425-464.
25. Leary S.J., Bhaskar A., Keane A.J. A knowledge-based approach to response surface modelling in multifidelity optimization. J. Glob. Optim. 2003, 26(3):297-319.
26. Legendre M., Schmidt A., Moussaoui S., Lammers U. Solving systems of linear equations by gpu-based matrix factorization in a science ground segment. Astronomy Comput. 2013, 34(0):58-64.
27. Liu F., West M. A dynamic modelling strategy for Bayesian computer model emulation. Bayesian Anal. 2009, 4:393-412.
28. Lunati I., Jenny P. Multiscale finite-volume method for density-driven flow in porous media. Comput. Geosci. 2008, 12(3):337-350.
29. Machac D., Reichert P., Albert C. Emulation of dynamic simulators with application to hydrology. J. Comput. Phys. In Rev. 2015.
30. Mancipe-Munoz N.A., Buchberger S.G., Suidan M.T., Lu T. Calibration of rainfall-runoff model in urban watersheds for stormwater management assessment. J. Water Resour. Plan. Manag. 2014, 140(6):05014001.
31. McKay M., Beckman R., Conover W. Comparison the three methods for selecting values of input variable in the analysis of output from a computer code. Technometrics (United States) May 1979, 21:2.
32. Muleta M.K., Boulos P.F. Analysis and calibration of rdii and design of sewer collection systems. The World Environmental & Water Resources Congress 2008, vol. 316:642.
33. O'Hagan A. Some bayesian numerical analysis. Bayesian stat. 1992, 4(345-363). 4-2.
34. O'Hagan A. Bayesian analysis of computer code outputs: a tutorial. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 2006, 91:1290-1300.
35. Razavi S., Tolson B.A., Burn D.H. Review of surrogate modeling in water resources. Water Resour. Res. 2012, 48(7).
36. 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.
37. Schütze M., Campisano A., Colas H., Schilling W., Vanrolleghem P.A. Real time control of urban wastewater systemswhere do we stand today?. J. Hydrol. 2004, 299(3):335-348.
38. Spiller E.T., Bayarri M., Berger J.O., Calder E.S., Patra A.K., Pitman E.B., Wolpert R.L. Automating emulator construction for geophysical hazard maps. SIAM/ASA J. Uncertain. Quantification 2014, 2(1):126-152.
39. Stieglitz M., Hobbie J., Giblin A., Kling G. Hydrologic modeling of an arctic tundra watershed: toward pan-arctic predictions. J. Geophys. Res. D. Atmos. 1999, 104:27.
40. Sudret B. Global sensitivity analysis using polynomial chaos expansions. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 2008, 93(7):964-979. (bayesian Networks in Dependability).
41. Vanrolleghem P., Benedetti L., Meirlaen J. Modelling and real-time control of the integrated urban wastewater system. Environ. Model. Softw. 2005, 20(4):427-442. (vulnerability of Water Quality in Intensively Developing Urban Watersheds).
42. Zurada J.M. Introduction to Artificial Neural Systems 1992, (West St. Paul).