Modelling errors calculation adapted to rainfall - Runoff model user expectations and discharge data uncertainties

A novel objective function for rainfall-runoff model calibration, named Discharge Envelop Catching (DEC), is proposed. DEC meets the objectives of: i) taking into account uncertainty of discharge observations, ii) enabling the end-user to define an acceptable uncertainty, that best fits his needs, for each part of the simulated hydrograph. A calibration methodology based on DEC is demonstrated on MARINE, an existing hydrological model dedicated to flash floods. Calibration results of state-of-the-art objective functions are benchmarked against the proposed objective function. The demonstration highlights the usefulness of the DEC objective function in identifying the strengths and weaknesses of a model in reproducing hydrological processes. These results emphasize the added value of considering uncertainty of discharge observations during calibration and of refining the measure of model error according to the objectives of the hydrological model. A novel objective function taking into account discharge observations uncertainty, model specifics and user-defined tolerance.A resulting calibration methodology is demonstrated on an existing hydrological model dedicated to flash floods.The results of state-of-the-art objective functions are benchmarked against the proposed objective function.

[1]  Hélène Roux,et al.  Parameter regionalization for a process-oriented distributed model dedicated to flash floods , 2015 .

[2]  George Kuczera,et al.  Critical evaluation of parameter consistency and predictive uncertainty in hydrological modeling: A case study using Bayesian total error analysis , 2009 .

[3]  P. J. Smith,et al.  A novel framework for discharge uncertainty quantification applied to 500 UK gauging stations , 2015, Water resources research.

[4]  D. Kavetski,et al.  Confronting Input Uncertainty in Environmental Modelling , 2013 .

[5]  George Kuczera,et al.  Bayesian analysis of input uncertainty in hydrological modeling: 1. Theory , 2006 .

[6]  Etienne Leblois,et al.  The SAFRAN‐ISBA‐MODCOU hydrometeorological model applied over France , 2008 .

[7]  F. Branger,et al.  Combining hydraulic knowledge and uncertain gaugings in the estimation of hydrometric rating curves: A Bayesian approach , 2014 .

[8]  David Huard,et al.  Calibration of hydrological model GR2M using Bayesian uncertainty analysis , 2008 .

[9]  Barry Croke.  The Role of Uncertainty in Design of Objective Functions , 2007 .

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

[11]  Hoshin Vijai Gupta,et al.  Decomposition of the mean squared error and NSE performance criteria: Implications for improving hydrological modelling , 2009 .

[12]  G. Kuczera.  Improved parameter inference in catchment models: 1. Evaluating parameter uncertainty , 1983 .

[13]  B. Schaefli,et al.  Earth System , 2005 .

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

[15]  Roger Moussa,et al.  When monstrosity can be beautiful while normality can be ugly: assessing the performance of event-based flood models , 2010 .

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

[17]  Brice Boudevillain,et al.  Geostatistical radar–raingauge merging: A novel method for the quantification of rain estimation accuracy , 2014 .

[18]  Hélène Roux,et al.  A physically-based parsimonious hydrological model for flash floods in Mediterranean catchments , 2011 .

[19]  J. Nash,et al.  River flow forecasting through conceptual models part I — A discussion of principles☆ , 1970 .

[20]  P. Tabary,et al.  The New French Operational Radar Rainfall Product. Part I: Methodology , 2007 .

[21]  Alexis Berne,et al.  Toward an error model for radar quantitative precipitation estimation in the Cevennes-Vivarais region, France ERAD 2006 , 2010 .

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

[23]  Witold F. Krajewski,et al.  Review of the Different Sources of Uncertainty in Single Polarization Radar-Based Estimates of Rainfall , 2010 .

[24]  G. Hornberger,et al.  Approach to the preliminary analysis of environmental systems , 1981 .

[25]  L. Gottschalk,et al.  Bayesian estimation of parameters in a regional hydrological model , 2002 .

[26]  Hilary McMillan,et al.  Rating curve estimation under epistemic uncertainty , 2015 .

[27]  Albert I. J. M. van Dijk,et al.  Streamflow rating uncertainty: Characterisation and impacts on model calibration and performance , 2015, Environ. Model. Softw..

[28]  D. Kavetski,et al.  Towards a Bayesian total error analysis of conceptual rainfall-runoff models: Characterising model error using storm-dependent parameters , 2006 .

[29]  Hoshin Vijai Gupta,et al.  Do Nash values have value? , 2007 .

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

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

[32]  Jan Seibert,et al.  On the need for benchmarks in hydrological modelling , 2001 .