Bayesian experimental design for identification of model propositions and conceptual model uncertainty reduction

Abstract The lack of hydrogeological data and knowledge often results in different propositions (or alternatives) to represent uncertain model components and creates many candidate groundwater models using the same data. Uncertainty of groundwater head prediction may become unnecessarily high. This study introduces an experimental design to identify propositions in each uncertain model component and decrease the prediction uncertainty by reducing conceptual model uncertainty. A discrimination criterion is developed based on posterior model probability that directly uses data to evaluate model importance. Bayesian model averaging (BMA) is used to predict future observation data. The experimental design aims to find the optimal number and location of future observations and the number of sampling rounds such that the desired discrimination criterion is met. Hierarchical Bayesian model averaging (HBMA) is adopted to assess if highly probable propositions can be identified and the conceptual model uncertainty can be reduced by the experimental design. The experimental design is implemented to a groundwater study in the Baton Rouge area, Louisiana. We design a new groundwater head observation network based on existing USGS observation wells. The sources of uncertainty that create multiple groundwater models are geological architecture, boundary condition, and fault permeability architecture. All possible design solutions are enumerated using a multi-core supercomputer. Several design solutions are found to achieve an 80%-identifiable groundwater model in 5 years by using six or more existing USGS wells. The HBMA result shows that each highly probable proposition can be identified for each uncertain model component once the discrimination criterion is achieved. The variances of groundwater head predictions are significantly decreased by reducing posterior model probabilities of unimportant propositions.

[1]  D. McKinney,et al.  Network design for predicting groundwater contamination , 1992 .

[2]  Nien-Sheng Hsu,et al.  Optimum experimental design for parameter identification in groundwater hydrology , 1989 .

[3]  Keming Yu,et al.  Bayesian Mode Regression , 2012, 1208.0579.

[4]  A. W. Harbaugh MODFLOW-2005 : the U.S. Geological Survey modular ground-water model--the ground-water flow process , 2005 .

[5]  William J. Hill,et al.  Discrimination Among Mechanistic Models , 1967 .

[6]  Keith Beven,et al.  Equifinality, data assimilation, and uncertainty estimation in mechanistic modelling of complex environmental systems using the GLUE methodology , 2001 .

[7]  David Draper,et al.  Assessment and Propagation of Model Uncertainty , 2011 .

[8]  Q. Kang,et al.  Optimization and uncertainty assessment of strongly nonlinear groundwater models with high parameter dimensionality , 2010 .

[9]  Thomas C. Harmon,et al.  Experimental design and model parameter estimation for locating a dissolving dense nonaqueous phase liquid pool in groundwater , 2002 .

[10]  A. Atkinson,et al.  Optimal design : Experiments for discriminating between several models , 1975 .

[11]  Bernard De Baets,et al.  Performance assessment of the anticipatory approach to optimal experimental design for model discrimination , 2012 .

[12]  Ming Ye,et al.  Maximum likelihood Bayesian averaging of spatial variability models in unsaturated fractured tuff , 2003 .

[13]  Adrian E. Raftery,et al.  Bayesian model averaging: a tutorial (with comments by M. Clyde, David Draper and E. I. George, and a rejoinder by the authors , 1999 .

[14]  Y. Rubin,et al.  A hypothesis‐driven approach to optimize field campaigns , 2012 .

[15]  J. Bredehoeft The conceptualization model problem—surprise , 2005 .

[16]  Petros Koumoutsakos,et al.  Reducing the Time Complexity of the Derandomized Evolution Strategy with Covariance Matrix Adaptation (CMA-ES) , 2003, Evolutionary Computation.

[17]  Peter D. H. Hill,et al.  A Review of Experimental Design Procedures for Regression Model Discrimination , 1978 .

[18]  Alain Dassargues,et al.  Conceptual model uncertainty in groundwater modeling: Combining generalized likelihood uncertainty estimation and Bayesian model averaging , 2008 .

[19]  Frank T.-C. Tsai,et al.  Constructive epistemic modeling of groundwater flow with geological structure and boundary condition uncertainty under the Bayesian paradigm , 2014 .

[20]  J. Pinto,et al.  Design of experiments for discrimination of rival models based on the expected number of eliminated models , 2012 .

[21]  Y. Rubin,et al.  Bayesian geostatistical design: Task‐driven optimal site investigation when the geostatistical model is uncertain , 2010 .

[22]  Brian J. Wagner,et al.  Sampling Design Methods For Groundwater Modeling Under Uncertainty , 1995 .

[23]  S. P. Neuman,et al.  Bayesian analysis of data-worth considering model and parameter uncertainties , 2012 .

[24]  Guido Buzzi-Ferraris,et al.  An improved version of a sequential design criterion for discriminating among rival multiresponse models , 1990 .

[25]  S. P. Neuman,et al.  Maximum likelihood Bayesian averaging of uncertain model predictions , 2003 .

[26]  S. F. Mousavi,et al.  An approach to the design of experiments for discriminating among alternative conceptual models , 1992 .

[27]  Frank T.-C. Tsai,et al.  Inverse groundwater modeling for hydraulic conductivity estimation using Bayesian model averaging and variance window , 2008 .

[28]  W. Yeh,et al.  Optimal observation network design for parameter structure identification in groundwater modeling , 2005 .

[29]  William W.-G. Yeh,et al.  Coupled inverse problems in groundwater modeling: 2. Identifiability and experimental design , 1990 .

[30]  William G. Hunter,et al.  Designs for Discriminating Between Two Rival Models , 1965 .

[31]  Sjoerd E. A. T. M. van der Zee,et al.  Measurement network design including traveltime determinations to minimize model prediction uncertainty , 2008 .

[32]  Clifford I. Voss,et al.  Multiobjective sampling design for parameter estimation and model discrimination in groundwater solute transport , 1989 .

[33]  P. A. Hsieh,et al.  Documentation of a computer program to simulate horizontal-flow barriers using the U.S. Geological Survey's modular three-dimensional finite-difference ground-water flow model , 1993 .

[34]  K. Jensen,et al.  The importance of alternative conceptual models for simulation of concentrations in a multi-aquifer system , 2007 .

[35]  S. Sorooshian,et al.  Multimodel Combination Techniques for Analysis of Hydrological Simulations: Application to Distributed Model Intercomparison Project Results , 2006 .

[36]  Y. Pachepsky,et al.  Augmentation of groundwater monitoring networks using information theory and ensemble modeling with pedotransfer functions , 2013 .

[37]  José Carlos Pinto,et al.  Sequential experimental design for model discrimination: Taking into account the posterior covariance matrix of differences between model predictions , 2008 .

[38]  Wolfgang Marquardt,et al.  Optimal Experimental Design for Discriminating Numerous Model Candidates: The AWDC Criterion , 2010 .

[39]  Ming Ye,et al.  Towards a comprehensive assessment of model structural adequacy , 2012 .

[40]  A. Atkinson,et al.  Optimum experimental design for discriminating between two rival models in the presence of prior information , 1991 .

[41]  John D Bredehoeft From models to performance assessment: the conceptualization problem. , 2003, Ground water.

[42]  Michael de Paly,et al.  Optimization of high‐reliability‐based hydrological design problems by robust automatic sampling of critical model realizations , 2010 .

[43]  Okke Batelaan,et al.  On the value of conditioning data to reduce conceptual model uncertainty in groundwater modeling , 2010 .

[44]  Andres Alcolea,et al.  Inverse problem in hydrogeology , 2005 .

[45]  Clifford I. Voss,et al.  Discrimination among one‐dimensional models of solute transport in porous media: Implications for sampling design , 1988 .

[46]  Ming Ye,et al.  A Model‐Averaging Method for Assessing Groundwater Conceptual Model Uncertainty , 2010, Ground water.

[47]  Clifford I. Voss,et al.  Sampling design for groundwater solute transport: Tests of methods and analysis of Cape Cod tracer test data , 1991 .

[48]  N. Sun Inverse problems in groundwater modeling , 1994 .

[49]  James L. Rosenberger,et al.  Experimental Designs for Model Discrimination , 1993 .

[50]  Frank T.-C. Tsai,et al.  Hierarchical Bayesian model averaging for hydrostratigraphic modeling: Uncertainty segregation and comparative evaluation , 2013 .

[51]  William W.-G. Yeh,et al.  Experimental design for groundwater modeling and management , 2006 .

[52]  Nikolaus Hansen,et al.  Completely Derandomized Self-Adaptation in Evolution Strategies , 2001, Evolutionary Computation.

[53]  D. Madigan,et al.  Bayesian Model Averaging for Linear Regression Models , 1997 .

[54]  Srikanta Mishra,et al.  Model Averaging Techniques for Quantifying Conceptual Model Uncertainty , 2010, Ground water.

[55]  Hans Bock,et al.  Optimal experimental design for parameter estimation in column outflow experiments , 2002 .

[56]  A. Raftery Bayesian Model Selection in Social Research , 1995 .

[57]  Frank T.-C. Tsai,et al.  Bayesian model averaging for groundwater head prediction and uncertainty analysis using multimodel and multimethod , 2009 .

[58]  F. Tsai,et al.  Indicator geostatistics for reconstructing Baton Rouge aquifer-fault hydrostratigraphy, Louisiana, USA , 2013, Hydrogeology Journal.

[59]  Jeroen P. van der Sluijs,et al.  A framework for dealing with uncertainty due to model structure error , 2004 .

[60]  A. Atkinson A Comparison of Two Criteria for the Design of Experiments for Discriminating Between Models , 1981 .

[61]  William W.-G. Yeh,et al.  Sampling Network Design for Transport Parameter Identification , 1990 .

[62]  A. Raftery,et al.  Discussion: Performance of Bayesian Model Averaging , 2003 .

[63]  David Anderson,et al.  Multimodel Ranking and Inference in Ground Water Modeling , 2004, Ground water.