A Methodology for Validating Numerical Ground Water Models

Ground water validation is one of the most challenging issues facing modelers and hydrogeologists. Increased complexity in ground water models has created a gap between model predictions and the ability to validate or build confidence in predictions. Specific procedures and tests that can be easily adapted and applied to determine the validity of site-specific ground water models do not exist. This is true for both deterministic and stochastic models, with stochastic models posing the more difficult validation problem. The objective of this paper is to propose a general validation approach that addresses important issues recognized in previous validation studies, conferences, and symposia. The proposed method links the processes for building, calibrating, evaluating, and validating models in an iterative loop. The approach focuses on using collected validation data to reduce uncertainty in the model and narrow the range of possible outcomes. This method is designed for stochastic numerical models utilizing Monte Carlo simulation approaches, but it can be easily adapted for deterministic models. The proposed methodology relies on the premise that absolute validity is not theoretically possible, nor is it a regulatory requirement. Rather, the proposed methodology highlights the importance of testing various aspects of the model and using diverse statistical tools for rigorous checking and confidence building in the model and its predictions. It is this confidence that will encourage regulators and the public to accept decisions based on the model predictions. This validation approach will be applied to a model, described in this paper, dealing with an underground nuclear test site in rural Nevada.

[1]  Michael T. Goodrich,et al.  Application of a validation strategy to Darcy's experiment , 1992 .

[2]  A. S. Cullick,et al.  A program to create permeability fields that honor single-phase flow rate and pressure data , 1999 .

[3]  Ahmed E. Hassan,et al.  Uncertainty Analysis of Radionuclide Transport in a Fractured Coastal Aquifer with Geothermal Effects , 2001 .

[4]  E. Poeter,et al.  Inverse Models: A Necessary Next Step in Ground‐Water Modeling , 1997 .

[5]  P. Flavelle,et al.  A quantitative measure of model validation and its potential use for regulatory purposes , 1992 .

[6]  K. Beven,et al.  Bayesian Estimation of Uncertainty in Runoff Prediction and the Value of Data: An Application of the GLUE Approach , 1996 .

[7]  A. Sahuquillo,et al.  Stochastic simulation of transmissivity fields conditional to both transmissivity and piezometric data—I. Theory , 1997 .

[8]  Keith Beven,et al.  Bayesian estimation of uncertainty in land surface‐atmosphere flux predictions , 1997 .

[9]  C. McCombie,et al.  VALIDATION - ANOTHER PERSPECTIVE , 1993 .

[10]  Chin-Fu Tsang,et al.  The Modeling Process and Model Validation , 1991 .

[11]  Osman Balci,et al.  A methodology for cost-risk analysis in the statistical validation of simulation models , 1981, CACM.

[12]  C. P. Jackson,et al.  Validation of transport models for use in repository performance assessments: A view illustrated for INTRAVAL test case 1b , 1992 .

[13]  D. Legates,et al.  Evaluating the use of “goodness‐of‐fit” Measures in hydrologic and hydroclimatic model validation , 1999 .

[14]  Mary P. Anderson,et al.  The role of the postaudit in model validation , 1992 .

[15]  Mary C. Hill,et al.  Death valley regional ground-water flow model calibration using optimal parameter estimation methods and geoscientific information systems , 1999 .

[16]  Andrés Sahuquillo,et al.  Stochastic simulation of transmissivity fields conditional to both transmissivity and piezometric head data—3. Application to the Culebra formation at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plan (WIPP), New Mexico, USA , 1998 .

[17]  G. Keller.  K-T boundary issues. , 1994, Science.

[18]  George Kuczera,et al.  The quest for more powerful validation of conceptual catchment models , 1997 .

[19]  Dennis McLaughlin,et al.  A stochastic approach to model validation , 1992 .

[20]  David W. Pollock,et al.  A Controlled Experiment in Ground Water Flow Model Calibration , 1998 .

[21]  A. Hassan,et al.  Modeling Ground Water Flow and Radioactive Transport in a Fractured Aquifer , 1999, Ground water.

[22]  D. A. Zimmerman,et al.  A comparison of seven geostatistically based inverse approaches to estimate transmissivities for modeling advective transport by groundwater flow , 1998 .

[23]  N Oreskes,et al.  Verification, Validation, and Confirmation of Numerical Models in the Earth Sciences , 1994, Science.

[24]  Ahmed E. Hassan,et al.  Remediation of the Faultless Underground Nuclear Test: Moving Forward in the Face of Model Uncertainty , 2001 .

[25]  Rachid Ababou,et al.  Testing procedures for spatially distributed flow models , 1992 .

[26]  Description of hydrogeologic heterogeneity and evaluation of radionuclide transport at an underground nuclear test , 2000 .

[27]  John D. Bredehoeft,et al.  Ground-water models cannot be validated , 1992 .

[28]  Chin-Fu Tsang,et al.  Comments on model validation , 1987 .

[29]  M Panjabi,et al.  Validation of mathematical models. , 1979, Journal of biomechanics.