Improving performance of bucket-type hydrological models in high latitudes with multi-model combination methods: Can we wring water from a stone?

被引:2
作者
Todorovic, A. [1 ]
Grabs, T. [2 ]
Teutschbein, C. [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Belgrade, Inst Hydraul & Environm Engn, Fac Civil Engn, Bulevar kralja Aleksandra 73, Belgrade 11000, Serbia
[2] Uppsala Univ, Dept Earth Sci, Program Air Water & Landscape Sci, Villavagen 16, S-75236 Uppsala, Sweden
基金
瑞典研究理事会;
关键词
Conceptual hydrological models; Extreme flows; High -latitude catchments; Hydrological signatures; Information theory; Multi -model averaging; RAINFALL-RUNOFF MODELS; CLIMATE-CHANGE IMPACTS; INFORMATION CRITERION; AVERAGING METHODS; CALIBRATION METRICS; FLOW SIMULATION; BIAS-CORRECTION; RIVER FLOW; STREAMFLOW; SELECTION;
D O I
10.1016/j.jhydrol.2024.130829
中图分类号
TU [建筑科学];
学科分类号
0813 ;
摘要
Multi-model combination (averaging) methods (MMCMs) are used to improve the accuracy of hydrological (precipitation-runoff) outputs in simulation or forecasting/prediction modes. In this paper, we examined if the application of MMCMs can improve model performance in reproducing distributions of hydrological signatures, such as annual maxima or minima of varying durations. To this end, ten MMCMs were applied to 29 bucket-type models to simulate runoff in 50 high-latitude catchments. The MMCMs were evaluated by comparing the resulting simulated flows to the reference (i.e., best-performing) individual model, considering various commonly used performance indicators, as well as model performance in reproducing the distributions of signatures. Additionally, we analysed whether (1) the selection of the candidate models, or (2) targeting specific signatures, such as annual maxima or minima, can improve performance of the model combinations. The results suggest that the application of MMCMs can improve accuracy of runoff simulations in terms of traditional performance indicators, but fails to improve performance in reproducing the distributions of signatures. Neither excluding poor-performing models nor applying the MMCMs with the targeted signatures, improves this aspect of model performance. These findings clearly reveal the need for further research aiming at enhancing model performance in reproducing the distributions of hydrological signatures, which is essential for climate-change impact studies.
引用
收藏
页数:20
相关论文
共 170 条
[1]   Evaluation of Snowmelt Estimation Techniques for Enhanced Spring Peak Flow Prediction [J].
Agnihotri, Jetal ;
Coulibaly, Paulin .
WATER, 2020, 12 (05)
[2]   An integrated hydrologic Bayesian multimodel combination framework: Confronting input, parameter, and model structural uncertainty in hydrologic prediction [J].
Ajami, Newsha K. ;
Duan, Qingyun ;
Sorooshian, Soroosh .
WATER RESOURCES RESEARCH, 2007, 43 (01)
[3]   STATISTICAL PREDICTOR IDENTIFICATION [J].
AKAIKE, H .
ANNALS OF THE INSTITUTE OF STATISTICAL MATHEMATICS, 1970, 22 (02) :203-&
[4]  
Andreassian V., 2006, IAHS-AISH Publ., V41-93
[5]  
[Anonymous], 2020, HBV-light,
[6]   Improving Hydrological Model Simulations with Combined Multi-Input and Multimodel Averaging Frameworks [J].
Arsenault, Richard ;
Essou, Gilles R. C. ;
Brissette, Francois P. .
JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGIC ENGINEERING, 2017, 22 (04)
[7]   A comparative analysis of 9 multi-model averaging approaches in hydrological continuous streamflow simulation [J].
Arsenault, Richard ;
Gatien, Philippe ;
Renaud, Benoit ;
Brissette, Francois ;
Martel, Jean-Luc .
JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGY, 2015, 529 :754-767
[8]   The role of hydrological modelling uncertainties in climate change impact assessments of Irish river catchments [J].
Bastola, Satish ;
Murphy, Conor ;
Sweeney, John .
ADVANCES IN WATER RESOURCES, 2011, 34 (05) :562-576
[9]   COMBINATION OF FORECASTS [J].
BATES, JM ;
GRANGER, CWJ .
OPERATIONAL RESEARCH QUARTERLY, 1969, 20 (04) :451-&
[10]   THE FUTURE OF DISTRIBUTED MODELS - MODEL CALIBRATION AND UNCERTAINTY PREDICTION [J].
BEVEN, K ;
BINLEY, A .
HYDROLOGICAL PROCESSES, 1992, 6 (03) :279-298