Facets of uncertainty: epistemic uncertainty, non-stationarity, likelihood, hypothesis testing, and communication

ABSTRACT This paper presents a discussion of some of the issues associated with the multiple sources of uncertainty and non-stationarity in the analysis and modelling of hydrological systems. Different forms of aleatory, epistemic, semantic, and ontological uncertainty are defined. The potential for epistemic uncertainties to induce disinformation in calibration data and arbitrary non-stationarities in model error characteristics, and surprises in predicting the future, are discussed in the context of other forms of non-stationarity. It is suggested that a condition tree is used to be explicit about the assumptions that underlie any assessment of uncertainty. This also provides an audit trail for providing evidence to decision makers. Editor D. Koutsoyiannis; Associate editor S. Weijs

[1]  Keith Beven,et al.  Estimation of flood inundation probabilities as conditioned on event inundation maps , 2003 .

[2]  Demetris Koutsoyiannis,et al.  Negligent killing of scientific concepts: the stationarity case , 2015 .

[3]  T. Edwards,et al.  Risk and Uncertainty Assessment for Natural Hazards , 2013 .

[4]  Keith Beven,et al.  Stage‐discharge uncertainty derived with a non‐stationary rating curve in the Choluteca River, Honduras , 2011 .

[5]  Keith Beven,et al.  Uncertainty assessment of a process-based integrated catchment model of phosphorus , 2009 .

[6]  Keith Beven,et al.  Informal likelihood measures in model assessment: Theoretic development and investigation , 2008 .

[7]  F. Pappenberger,et al.  Climate impacts on river flow: projections for the Medway catchment, UK, with UKCP09 and CATCHMOD , 2010 .

[8]  Keith Beven,et al.  Comment on “Pursuing the method of multiple working hypotheses for hydrological modeling” by P. Clark et al. , 2012 .

[9]  John Ewen,et al.  Validation of catchment models for predicting land-use and climate change impacts. 3. Blind validation for internal and outlet responses , 2004 .

[10]  Chong-Yu Xu,et al.  Disinformative data in large-scale hydrological modelling , 2013 .

[11]  Valérie Monfort,et al.  Bridging the Gap between , 2012 .

[12]  Keith Beven,et al.  Probabilistic flood risk mapping including spatial dependence , 2013 .

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

[14]  Suraje Dessai,et al.  Robust adaptation to climate change , 2010 .

[15]  J. Vrugt,et al.  A formal likelihood function for parameter and predictive inference of hydrologic models with correlated, heteroscedastic, and non‐Gaussian errors , 2010 .

[16]  Keith J. Beven,et al.  Environmental Modelling: An Uncertain Future?: An Introduction to Techniques for Uncertainty Estimation in Environmental Prediction , 2010 .

[17]  Jim W. Hall,et al.  On not undermining the science: coherence, validation and expertise. Discussion of Invited Commentary by Keith Beven Hydrological Processes, 20, 3141–3146 (2006) , 2007 .

[18]  Andrew Binley,et al.  GLUE: 20 years on , 2014 .

[19]  Dmitri Kavetski,et al.  Reply to comment by K. Beven et al. on “Pursuing the method of multiple working hypotheses for hydrological modeling” , 2012 .

[20]  K. Beven,et al.  Equifinality and uncertainty in physically based soil erosion models: Application of the glue methodology to WEPP-the water erosion prediction project-for sites in the UK and USA , 2000 .

[21]  David J. Nott,et al.  Generalized likelihood uncertainty estimation (GLUE) and approximate Bayesian computation: What's the connection? , 2012 .

[22]  Keith Beven,et al.  A manifesto for the equifinality thesis , 2006 .

[23]  R. T. Cox Probability, frequency and reasonable expectation , 1990 .

[24]  Ezio Todini,et al.  Comment on: ‘On undermining the science?’ by Keith Beven , 2007 .

[25]  K. Beven,et al.  A limits of acceptability approach to model evaluation and uncertainty estimation in flood frequency estimation by continuous simulation: Skalka catchment, Czech Republic , 2009 .

[26]  Demetris Koutsoyiannis,et al.  A blueprint for process‐based modeling of uncertain hydrological systems , 2012 .

[27]  Carel Dieperink,et al.  Uncertainty management strategies: Lessons from the regional implementation of the Water Framework Directive in the Netherlands , 2011 .

[28]  Keith Beven,et al.  Model and data limitations:The sources and implications of epistemic uncertainty , 2013 .

[29]  Robert J. Moore,et al.  How might climate change affect river flows across the Thames Basin? An area-wide analysis using the UKCP09 Regional Climate Model ensemble , 2012 .

[30]  Ian Boyd Making science count in government , 2013, eLife.

[31]  Bellie Sivakumar,et al.  Undermining the science or undermining Nature? , 2008 .

[32]  Anjan Chakravartty,et al.  The Dappled World: A Study of the Boundaries of Science , 2000 .

[33]  Keith Beven,et al.  I believe in climate change but how precautionary do we need to be in planning for the future? , 2011 .

[34]  John Ewen,et al.  VALIDATION OF CATCHMENT MODELS FOR PREDICTING LAND-USE AND CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS. : 2. CASE STUDY FOR A MEDITERRANEAN CATCHMENT , 1996 .

[35]  Holger R. Maier,et al.  Future research challenges for incorporation of uncertainty in environmental and ecological decision-making , 2008 .

[36]  Keith Beven,et al.  So how much of your error is epistemic? Lessons from Japan and Italy , 2013 .

[37]  Francis W. Zwiers,et al.  Guidance Note for Lead Authors of the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report on Consistent Treatment of Uncertainties , 2010 .

[38]  Keith Beven,et al.  Modelling the chloride signal at Plynlimon, Wales, using a modified dynamic TOPMODEL incorporating conservative chemical mixing (with uncertainty) , 2007 .

[39]  J. McDonnell,et al.  Constraining dynamic TOPMODEL responses for imprecise water table information using fuzzy rule based performance measures , 2004 .

[40]  Helen M. Regan,et al.  A TAXONOMY AND TREATMENT OF UNCERTAINTY FOR ECOLOGY AND CONSERVATION BIOLOGY , 2002 .

[41]  Alex B. McBratney,et al.  On Variation, Uncertainty and Informatics in Environmental Soil Management , 1992 .

[42]  Peter C. Young,et al.  Visualization approaches for communicating real‐time flood forecasting level and inundation information , 2010 .

[43]  K Beven,et al.  On the concept of model structural error. , 2005, Water science and technology : a journal of the International Association on Water Pollution Research.

[44]  Keith Beven,et al.  On the colour and spin of epistemic error (and what we might do about it) , 2011 .

[45]  Richard G. Jones,et al.  Comparison of the use of alternative UKCP09 products for modelling the impacts of climate change on flood frequency , 2012, Climatic Change.

[46]  Jery R. Stedinger,et al.  Appraisal of the generalized likelihood uncertainty estimation (GLUE) method , 2008 .

[47]  Keith Beven,et al.  Data‐based modelling of runoff and chemical tracer concentrations in the Haute‐Mentue research catchment (Switzerland) , 2005 .

[48]  Keith Beven,et al.  A guide to good practice in modeling semantics for authors and referees , 2013 .

[49]  Hoshin Vijai Gupta,et al.  Debates—the future of hydrological sciences: A (common) path forward? Using models and data to learn: A systems theoretic perspective on the future of hydrological science , 2014 .

[50]  Keith Beven,et al.  Calibration of hydrological models using flow-duration curves , 2010 .

[51]  Keith Beven,et al.  Modelling everything everywhere: a new approach to decision-making for water management under uncertainty , 2012 .

[52]  Keith Beven,et al.  Developing a Translational Discourse to Communicate Uncertainty in Flood Risk between Science and the Practitioner , 2007, Ambio.

[53]  A. Brath,et al.  A stochastic approach for assessing the uncertainty of rainfall‐runoff simulations , 2004 .

[54]  Dmitri Kavetski,et al.  Pursuing the method of multiple working hypotheses for hydrological modeling , 2011 .

[55]  Anil K. Jain,et al.  Algorithms for Clustering Data , 1988 .

[56]  Keith Beven,et al.  Concepts of Information Content and Likelihood in Parameter Calibration for Hydrological Simulation Models , 2014 .

[57]  J. Freer,et al.  Benchmarking observational uncertainties for hydrology: rainfall, river discharge and water quality , 2012 .

[58]  Cajo J. F. ter Braak,et al.  Treatment of input uncertainty in hydrologic modeling: Doing hydrology backward with Markov chain Monte Carlo simulation , 2008 .

[59]  K. Beven Towards a coherent philosophy for modelling the environment , 2002, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[60]  J. Vrugt,et al.  Toward diagnostic model calibration and evaluation: Approximate Bayesian computation , 2013 .

[61]  Keith Beven,et al.  Causal models as multiple working hypotheses about environmental processes , 2012 .

[62]  Jim Freer,et al.  Uncertainties in data and models to describe event dynamics of agricultural sediment and phosphorus transfer. , 2009, Journal of environmental quality.

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

[64]  Demetris Koutsoyiannis,et al.  HESS Opinions "A random walk on water" , 2009 .

[65]  Keith Beven,et al.  Environmental Modelling , 2007 .

[66]  Keith Beven,et al.  Multi-period and multi-criteria model conditioning to reduce prediction uncertainty in an application of TOPMODEL within the GLUE framework , 2007 .

[67]  Keith Beven,et al.  On red herrings and real herrings: disinformation and information in hydrological inference , 2011 .

[68]  Demetris Koutsoyiannis,et al.  Estimating the Uncertainty of Hydrological Predictions through Data-Driven Resampling Techniques , 2015 .

[69]  K. Beven On undermining the science? , 2006 .

[70]  Stuart Hamilton Just say NO to equifinality , 2007 .

[71]  Keith Beven,et al.  Framework for assessing uncertainty in fluvial flood risk mapping , 2014 .

[72]  P. Mantovan,et al.  Hydrological forecasting uncertainty assessment: Incoherence of the GLUE methodology , 2006 .

[73]  Keith Beven,et al.  Preferential flows and travel time distributions: defining adequate hypothesis tests for hydrological process models , 2010 .

[74]  Alberto Montanari,et al.  What do we mean by ‘uncertainty’? The need for a consistent wording about uncertainty assessment in hydrology , 2007 .

[75]  Florian Pappenberger,et al.  Impacts of uncertain river flow data on rainfall‐runoff model calibration and discharge predictions , 2010 .

[76]  George Kuczera,et al.  There are no hydrological monsters, just models and observations with large uncertainties! , 2010 .

[77]  J. Vrugt,et al.  Approximate Bayesian Computation using Markov Chain Monte Carlo simulation: DREAM(ABC) , 2014 .

[78]  Florian Pappenberger,et al.  Grasping the unavoidable subjectivity in calibration of flood inundation models: A vulnerability weighted approach , 2007 .

[79]  Keith Beven,et al.  The future of distributed models: model calibration and uncertainty prediction. , 1992 .

[80]  Jim Freer,et al.  Towards a limits of acceptability approach to the calibration of hydrological models : Extending observation error , 2009 .

[81]  George Kuczera,et al.  Understanding predictive uncertainty in hydrologic modeling: The challenge of identifying input and structural errors , 2010 .

[82]  Jasper A. Vrugt,et al.  Bridging the gap between GLUE and formal statistical approaches: approximate Bayesian computation , 2013 .

[83]  Keith Beven,et al.  On doing better hydrological science , 2008 .

[84]  W. Gray,et al.  A unifying framework for watershed thermodynamics: constitutive relationships , 1999 .

[85]  Keith Beven,et al.  Processes influencing model-data mismatch in drought-stressed, fire-disturbed eddy flux sites , 2010 .