Debates—Hypothesis testing in hydrology: A subsurface perspective

Water Resources Research

Volumn 53, Issue 3, 2017, Pages 1784-1791

  Neuweiler, Insa ^a   Helmig, Rainer ^b  

^a LEIBNIZ UNIVERSITY HANNOVER   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF STUTTGART   (Germany)

Author keywords

model development; model hypotheses; subsurface flow modeling

Indexed keywords

RANDOM PROCESSES; STANDARDS;

ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS; FLOW AND TRANSPORT; HYPOTHESIS TESTING; MODEL DESCRIPTION; MODEL DEVELOPMENT; MODELING CONCEPTS; SUBSURFACE FLOW; UNCERTAIN MODELING;

UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS;

EID: 85017029445     PISSN: 00431397     EISSN: 19447973     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/2016WR020047     Document Type: Note

References (41)

1. Arnold, D., V. Demyanov, M. Christie, A. Bakay, and K. Gopa (2016), Optimisation of decision making under uncertainty throughout field lifetime: A fractured reservoir example, Comput. Geosci., 95, 123–139.
2. Baker, V. R. (2017), Debates—Hypothesis testing in hydrology: Pursuing certainty versus pursuing uberty, Water Resour. Res., 53, doi:10.1002/2016WR020078.
3. Berkowitz, B., and H. Scher (1997), Anomalous transport in random fracture networks, Phys. Rev. Lett., 79, 4038–4041.
4. Beven, K. (2002), Towards a coherent philosophy for modelling the environment, Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A, 458, 2465–2484.
5. Blunt, M. J., B. Bijeljic, H. Dong, O. Gharbi, S. Iglauer, P. Mostaghimi, A. Paluszny, and C. Pentland (2013), Pore-scale imaging and modelling, Adv. Water Resour., 51, 197–216.
6. Brunner, P., and C. T. Simmons (2012), HydroGeoSphere: A fully integrated, physically based hydrological model, Ground Water, 50, 170–176.
7. Clark, M. P., D. Kavetski, and R. Fenicia (2011), Pursuing the method of multiple working hypotheses for hydrological modeling, Water Resour. Res., 47, W09301, doi:10.1029/2010WR009827.
8. Clark, M. P., et al. (2016), Improving the theoretical underpinning of process-based hydrological models, Water Resour. Res., 52, 2350–2365, doi:10.1002/2015WR017910.
9. Cueto-Felgueroso, L., and R. Juanes (2009), A phase field model of unsaturated flow, Water Resour. Res., 45, W10409, doi:10.1029/2009WR007945.
10. Cushman, J. H., and T. R. Ginn (2000), Fractional advection-dispersion equation: A classical mass balance with convolution-Fickian flux, Water Resour. Res., 36, 3763–3766.
11. de Marsily, G., P. Combes, and P. Goblet (1992), Comment on ‘Ground-water models cannot be validated’, by L. F. Konikow and J. D. Bredehoeft, Adv. Water Resour., 15, 367–369.
12. Dentz, M., T. Le Borgne, A. Englert, and B. Bijeljic (2011), Mixing, spreading and reaction in heterogeneous media: A brief review, J. Contam. Hydrol., 120–121, 1–17.
13. Diamantopoulos, E., and W. Durner (2012), Dynamic nonequilibrium of water flow in porous media: A review, Vadose Zone J., 11(3), 1–18, doi:10.2136/vzj2011.0197.
14. DiCarlo, D. A. (2013), Stability of gravity-driven multiphase flow in porous media: 40 Years of advancements, Water Resour. Res., 49, 4531–4544, doi:10.1002/wrcr.20359.
15. Fetzer, T., K. Smits, and R. Helmig (2016), Effect of turbulence and roughness on coupled porous-medium/free-flow exchange processes, Transp. Porous Media, 114, 395–424, doi:10.1007/s11242-016-0654-6.
16. Gerke, H. H. (2006), Review article: Preferential flow descriptions for structured soils, J. Plant Nutr. Soil Sci., 169, 382–400.
17. Gupta, H. V., M. P. Clark, J. A. Vrugt, G. Abramowitz, and M. Ye (2012), Towards a comprehensive assessment of model structural adequacy, Water Resour. Res., 48, W08301, doi:10.1029/2011WR011044.
18. Haggerty, R., and S. M. Gorelick (1995), Multiple-rate mass transfer for modeling diffusion and surface reactions in media with pore-scale heterogeneity, Water Resour. Res., 31, 2383–2400.
19. Hassanizadeh, S. M., and W. G. Gray (1979), General conservation equations for multi-phase systems, 1, Averaging procedure, Adv. Water Resour., 2, 131–144.
20. Hassanizadeh, S. M., M. A. Celia, and H. K. Dahle (2002), Dynamic effect in the capillary pressure-saturation relationship and its impacts on unsaturated flow, Vadose Zone J., 1, 38–57.
21. Hilfer, R. (2006), Macroscopic capillarity and hysteresis for flow in porous media, Phys. Rev. E, 73, 016307.
22. Hoogland, F., P. Lehmann, and D. Or (2015), The formation of viscous limited saturation zones behind rapid drainage fronts in porous media, Water Resour. Res., 51, 9862–9890, doi:10.1002/2015WR016980.
23. Joekar-Niasar, V., and S. M. Hassanizadeh (2011), Specific interfacial area: The missing state variable in two-phase flow equations?, Water Resour. Res., 47, W05513, doi:10.1029/2010WR009291.
24. Kollet, S. J., and R. M. Maxwell (2006), Integrated surface-groundwater flow modeling: A free-surface overland flow boundary condition in a parallel groundwater flow model, Adv. Water Resour., 29, 945–958.
25. Konikow, L. F., and J. D. Bredehoeft (1992), Ground-water models cannot be validated, Adv. Water Resour., 15, 75–83.
26. Le Borgne, T., M. Dentz, and E. Villermaux (2015), The lamellar description of mixing in porous media, J. Fluid Mech., 770, 458–498.
27. McKnight, D. M. (2017), Debates—Hypothesis testing in hydrology: A view from the field: The value of hydrologic hypotheses in designing field studies and interpreting the results to advance hydrology, Water Resour. Res., 53, doi:10.1002/2016WR020050.
28. Moebius, F., and D. Or (2014), Pore scale dynamics underlying the motion of drainage fronts in porous media, Water Resour. Res., 50, 8441–8457, doi:10.1002/2014WR015916.
29. Mosthaf, K., R. Helmig, and D. Or (2014), Modeling and analysis of evaporation processes from porous media on the REV scale, Water Resour. Res., 50, 1059–1079, doi:10.1002/2013WR014442.
30. Neuman, S. P., and D. M. Tartakovsky (2006), Perspective on theories of non-Fickian transport in heterogeneous media, Adv. Water Resour., 32, 670–680.
31. Nowak, W., Y. Rubin, and F. P. J. de Barros (2012), A hypothesis-driven approach to optimize field campaigns, Water Resour. Res., 48, W06509, doi:10.1029/2011WR011016.
32. Pfister, L., and J. W. Kirchner (2017), Debates—Hypothesis testing in hydrology: Theory and practice, Water Resour. Res., 53, doi:10.1002/2016WR020116.
33. Refsgaard, J. C., J. P. van der Sluijs, J. Brown, and P. van der Keur (2006), A framework for dealing with uncertainty due to model structure error, Adv. Water Resour., 29, 1586–1597.
34. Rücker, M., et al. (2015), From connected pathway flow to ganglion dynamics, Geophys. Res. Lett., 42, 3888–3894, doi:10.1002/2015GL064007.
35. Schlüter, S., H.-J. Vogel, O. Ippisch, P. Bastian, K. Roth, H. Schelle, W. Durner, R. Kasteel, and J. Vanderborgth (2012), Virtual soils: Assessment of the effect of soil structure on the hydraulic behavior of cultivated soils, Vadose Zone J., 411(4), 264–278, doi:10.2136/vzj2011.0174.
36. Shrestha, P., M. Sulis, S. Masbou, S. Kollet, and C. Simmer (2014), A scale-consistent terrestrial systems modeling platform based on COSMO, CLM and ParFlow, Mon. Weather Rev., 142, 3466–3483.
37. van Duijn, J. C., S. M. Hassanizadeh, I. S. Pop, and P. A. Zegeling (2013), Non-equilibrium models for two-phase flow in porous media; the occurrence of saturation overshoot, in Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Applications of Porous Media, pp. 59–70, 25–28 August 2013, Bables-Bolyai Univ., Cluj-Napoca.
38. VanderKwaak, J. E., and K. Loage (2001), Hydrologic-response simulation for the R-5 catchment with a comprehensive physics-based model, Water Resour. Res., 37, 999–1013.
39. Vogel, H.-J., and K. Roth (2003), Moving through scales of flow and transport in soil, J. Hydrol., 272, 95–106.
40. Vrugt, J. A., C. G. H. Diks, and H. V. Gupta (2005), Improved treatment of uncertainty in hydrologic modeling: Combining the strengths of global optimization and data assimilation, Water Resour. Res., 41, W01017, doi:10.1029/2004WR003059.
41. Zehe, E., et al. (2014), HESS opinions: From response units to functional units: A thermodynamic reinterpretation of the HRU concept to link spatial organization and functioning of intermediate scale catchments, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 18, 4635–4655.