CATCHMENT SCALE HYDROLOGICAL MODELLING: A REVIEW OF MODEL TYPES, CALIBRATION APPROACHES AND UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS METHODS IN THE CONTEXT OF RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN TECHNOLOGY AND APPLICATIONS

被引:0
作者
Pechlivanidis, I. G. [1 ]
Jackson, B. M. [1 ]
Mcintyre, N. R. [2 ]
Wheater, H. S. [2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Victoria Univ Wellington, Sch Geog Environm & Earth Sci, Wellington, New Zealand
[2] Univ Saskatchewan, Dept Civil & Environm Engn, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5C8, Canada
[3] Univ Saskatchewan, Sch Environm & Sustainabil, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5C8, Canada
来源
GLOBAL NEST JOURNAL | 2011年 / 13卷 / 03期
关键词
Hydrological models; Model identification; Calibration; Uncertainty; Sensitivity analysis; CLIMATE-CHANGE IMPACTS; PREDICTING LAND-USE; SENSITIVITY-ANALYSIS; PARAMETER-ESTIMATION; STREAMFLOW ESTIMATION; RUNOFF; RAINFALL; FLOW; IDENTIFICATION; SIMULATION;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
In catchment hydrology, it is in practice impossible to measure everything we would like to know about the hydrological system, mainly due to high catchment heterogeneity and the limitations of measurement techniques. These limitations and the need to extrapolate information from the available measurements in both space and time initiated the application of hydrological models. However, hydrological models suffer from uncertainty in their predictions, which reduces applicability of and confidence in such models. In this review, we summarise the different classifications of hydrological model types, and discuss relative advantages and disadvantages of each type of model. In addition, we summarise established model calibration processes and discuss the sources of uncertainty that affect model predictions. We summarise different methods to quantify uncertainty in the model predictions that could sit well within a model evaluation framework. And, finally, some recent developments in hydrological modelling are reviewed.
引用
收藏
页码:193 / 214
页数:22
相关论文
共 158 条
[1]   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)
[2]  
Ajami NK, 2004, J HYDROL, V298, P112, DOI [10.1016/j.jhydrol.2004.03.033, 10.1016/j.hydrol.2004.03.033]
[3]   Critical regions: A model-based estimation of world water resources sensitive to global changes [J].
Alcamo, J ;
Henrichs, T .
AQUATIC SCIENCES, 2002, 64 (04) :352-362
[4]   Variability in simulated recharge using different GCMs [J].
Allen, D. M. ;
Cannon, A. J. ;
Toews, M. W. ;
Scibek, J. .
WATER RESOURCES RESEARCH, 2010, 46
[5]  
[Anonymous], FD2114TR R D
[6]  
[Anonymous], 1995, COMPUTER MODELS WATE
[7]  
[Anonymous], 1999, THESIS RUTGERS U NEW
[8]   A COMPREHENSIVE SURFACE-GROUNDWATER FLOW MODEL [J].
ARNOLD, JG ;
ALLEN, PM ;
BERNHARDT, G .
JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGY, 1993, 142 (1-4) :47-69
[9]   A top-down framework for watershed model evaluation and selection under uncertainty [J].
Bai, Yaoling ;
Wagener, Thorsten ;
Reed, Patrick .
ENVIRONMENTAL MODELLING & SOFTWARE, 2009, 24 (08) :901-916
[10]  
Ballard C., J HYDROLOGY IN PRESS