Ensemble Kalman filter versus ensemble smoother for assessing hydraulic conductivity via tracer test data assimilation

Abstract. Estimating the spatial variability of hydraulic conductivity K in natural aquifers is important for predicting the transport of dissolved compounds. Especially in the nonreactive case, the plume evolution is mainly controlled by the heterogeneity of K. At the local scale, the spatial distribution of K can be inferred by combining the Lagrangian formulation of the transport with a Kalman-filter-based technique and assimilating a sequence of time-lapse concentration C measurements, which, for example, can be evaluated on site through the application of a geophysical method. The objective of this work is to compare the ensemble Kalman filter (EnKF) and the ensemble smoother (ES) capabilities to retrieve the hydraulic conductivity spatial distribution in a groundwater flow and transport modeling framework. The application refers to a two-dimensional synthetic aquifer in which a tracer test is simulated. Moreover, since Kalman-filter-based methods are optimal only if each of the involved variables fit to a Gaussian probability density function (pdf) and since this condition may not be met by some of the flow and transport state variables, issues related to the non-Gaussianity of the variables are analyzed and different transformation of the pdfs are considered in order to evaluate their influence on the performance of the methods. The results show that the EnKF reproduces with good accuracy the hydraulic conductivity field, outperforming the ES regardless of the pdf of the concentrations.

[1]  Bill X. Hu,et al.  Data assimilation methods for estimating a heterogeneous conductivity field by assimilating transient solute transport data via ensemble Kalman filter , 2013 .

[2]  Harry Vereecken,et al.  Multivariate and Multiscale Data Assimilation in Terrestrial Systems: A Review , 2012, Sensors.

[3]  Andrew Binley,et al.  A saline tracer test monitored via both surface and cross-borehole electrical resistivity tomography: Comparison of time-lapse results , 2012 .

[4]  H. Franssen,et al.  Parameter estimation by ensemble Kalman filters with transformed data: Approach and application to hydraulic tomography , 2012 .

[5]  Harrie-Jan Hendricks Franssen,et al.  Jointly Mapping Hydraulic Conductivity and Porosity by Assimilating Concentration Data via Ensemble Kalman Filter , 2012 .

[6]  Olaf A. Cirpka,et al.  Fully coupled hydrogeophysical inversion of a laboratory salt tracer experiment monitored by electrical resistivity tomography , 2012 .

[7]  Rita Deiana,et al.  Assessment of local hydraulic properties from electrical resistivity tomography monitoring of a three‐dimensional synthetic tracer test experiment , 2011 .

[8]  Domenico Baù,et al.  Estimating geostatistical parameters and spatially-variable hydraulic conductivity within a catchment system using an ensemble smoother , 2011 .

[9]  Liangping Li,et al.  An approach to handling non-Gaussianity of parameters and state variables in ensemble Kalman filtering , 2011 .

[10]  Harrie-Jan Hendricks Franssen,et al.  Operational real‐time modeling with ensemble Kalman filter of variably saturated subsurface flow including stream‐aquifer interaction and parameter updating , 2011 .

[11]  Domenico Baù,et al.  Ensemble smoother assimilation of hydraulic head and return flow data to estimate hydraulic conductivity distribution , 2010 .

[12]  Y. Rubin,et al.  A Bayesian approach for inverse modeling, data assimilation, and conditional simulation of spatial random fields , 2010 .

[13]  Wolfgang Nowak,et al.  Best unbiased ensemble linearization and the quasi‐linear Kalman ensemble generator , 2009 .

[14]  W. Kinzelbach,et al.  Real‐time groundwater flow modeling with the Ensemble Kalman Filter: Joint estimation of states and parameters and the filter inbreeding problem , 2008 .

[15]  Domenico A Baú,et al.  Optimal design of pump-and-treat systems under uncertain hydraulic conductivity and plume distribution. , 2008, Journal of contaminant hydrology.

[16]  Dongxiao Zhang,et al.  Investigation of flow and transport processes at the MADE site using ensemble Kalman filter , 2008 .

[17]  J. Vrugt,et al.  Inverse Modeling of Subsurface Flow and Transport Properties: A Review with New Developments , 2008 .

[18]  Xian-Huan Wen,et al.  Real-Time Reservoir Model Updating Using Ensemble Kalman Filter With Confirming Option , 2006 .

[19]  Yan Chen,et al.  Data assimilation for transient flow in geologic formations via ensemble Kalman filter , 2006 .

[20]  E. Caroni,et al.  Analysis of Concentration as Sampled in , 2005 .

[21]  G. Evensen.  Sampling strategies and square root analysis schemes for the EnKF , 2004 .

[22]  Alexander Y. Sun,et al.  Solute flux approach to transport through spatially nonstationary flow in porous media , 2000 .

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

[24]  Virgilio Fiorotto,et al.  Solute transport in highly heterogeneous aquifers , 1998 .

[25]  D. McLaughlin,et al.  A Reassessment of the Groundwater Inverse Problem , 1996 .

[26]  A. Rinaldo,et al.  Eulerian-Lagrangian approach for modeling of flow and transport in heterogeneous geological formations , 1994 .

[27]  E. Eric Adams,et al.  Field study of dispersion in a heterogeneous aquifer: 1. Overview and site description , 1992 .

[28]  L. Gelhar.  Stochastic Subsurface Hydrology , 1992 .

[29]  A. Rinaldo,et al.  Simulation of dispersion in heterogeneous porous formations: Statistics, first‐order theories, convergence of computations , 1992 .

[30]  R. Ababou,et al.  Numerical simulation of three-dimensional saturated flow in randomly heterogeneous porous media , 1989 .

[31]  D. W. Pollock.  Semianalytical Computation of Path Lines for Finite‐Difference Models , 1988 .

[32]  D. Stensrud,et al.  The Ensemble Kalman Filter for Combined State and Parameter Estimation , 2009 .

[33]  Geir Evensen,et al.  The ensemble Kalman filter for combined state and parameter estimation: MONTE CARLO TECHNIQUES FOR DATA ASSIMILATION IN LARGE SYSTEMS , 2009 .

[34]  Geir Evensen,et al.  Sequential data assimilation , 2009 .

[35]  Manfred Glesner,et al.  the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License. , 2009 .

[36]  G. Evensen.  Data Assimilation: The Ensemble Kalman Filter , 2006 .

[37]  J. A. Vargas-Guzmán,et al.  Sequential kriging and cokriging: Two powerful geostatistical approaches , 1999 .

[38]  G. Dagan.  Flow and transport in porous formations , 1989 .

[39]  E. Caroni,et al.  Analysis of Concentration as Sampled in Natural Aquifers , 2022 .