Uncertainty assessment of a process-based integrated catchment model of phosphorus

被引:0
作者
Sarah Dean
Jim Freer
Keith Beven
Andrew J. Wade
Dan Butterfield
机构
[1] Lancaster University,Lancaster Environment Centre
[2] University of Reading,Aquatic Environments Research Centre, Department of Geography
[3] University of Bristol,School of Geographical Sciences
来源
Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment | 2009年 / 23卷
关键词
INCA-P; GLUE; Uncertainty estimation; Phosphorus models; Diffuse agricultural pollution; Water quality modelling;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Despite the many models developed for phosphorus concentration prediction at differing spatial and temporal scales, there has been little effort to quantify uncertainty in their predictions. Model prediction uncertainty quantification is desirable, for informed decision-making in river-systems management. An uncertainty analysis of the process-based model, integrated catchment model of phosphorus (INCA-P), within the generalised likelihood uncertainty estimation (GLUE) framework is presented. The framework is applied to the Lugg catchment (1,077 km2), a River Wye tributary, on the England–Wales border. Daily discharge and monthly phosphorus (total reactive and total), for a limited number of reaches, are used to initially assess uncertainty and sensitivity of 44 model parameters, identified as being most important for discharge and phosphorus predictions. This study demonstrates that parameter homogeneity assumptions (spatial heterogeneity is treated as land use type fractional areas) can achieve higher model fits, than a previous expertly calibrated parameter set. The model is capable of reproducing the hydrology, but a threshold Nash-Sutcliffe co-efficient of determination (E or R2) of 0.3 is not achieved when simulating observed total phosphorus (TP) data in the upland reaches or total reactive phosphorus (TRP) in any reach. Despite this, the model reproduces the general dynamics of TP and TRP, in point source dominated lower reaches. This paper discusses why this application of INCA-P fails to find any parameter sets, which simultaneously describe all observed data acceptably. The discussion focuses on uncertainty of readily available input data, and whether such process-based models should be used when there isn’t sufficient data to support the many parameters.
引用
收藏
页码:991 / 1010
页数:19
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Assessment of flood forecasting lead time based on generalized likelihood uncertainty estimation approach
    Heidari, A.
    Saghafian, B.
    Maknoon, R.
    STOCHASTIC ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND RISK ASSESSMENT, 2006, 20 (05) : 363 - 380
  • [32] Assessment of flood forecasting lead time based on generalized likelihood uncertainty estimation approach
    A. Heidari
    B. Saghafian
    R. Maknoon
    Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment, 2006, 20 : 363 - 380
  • [33] Uncertainty estimation in automatic pronunciation assessment with pseudo samples based on deep kernel learning
    Lin, Binghuai
    Wang, Liyuan
    2021 ASIA-PACIFIC SIGNAL AND INFORMATION PROCESSING ASSOCIATION ANNUAL SUMMIT AND CONFERENCE (APSIPA ASC), 2021, : 1031 - 1036
  • [34] Model-Based Offline Reinforcement Learning With Uncertainty Estimation and Policy Constraint
    Zhu J.
    Du C.
    Dullerud G.E.
    IEEE Transactions on Artificial Intelligence, 2024, 5 (12): : 6066 - 6079
  • [35] Effect of formal and informal likelihood functions on uncertainty assessment in a single event rainfall-runoff model
    Nourali, Mahrouz
    Ghahraman, Bijan
    Pourreza-Bilondi, Mohsen
    Davary, Kamran
    JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGY, 2016, 540 : 549 - 564
  • [36] Assessment of model behavior and acceptable forcing data uncertainty in the context of land surface soil moisture estimation
    Dumedah, Gift
    Walker, Jeffrey P.
    ADVANCES IN WATER RESOURCES, 2017, 101 : 23 - 36
  • [37] Tool wear assessment based on type-2 fuzzy uncertainty estimation on acoustic emission
    Ren, Qun
    Baron, Luc
    Balazinski, Marek
    Botez, Ruxandra
    Bigras, Pascal
    APPLIED SOFT COMPUTING, 2015, 31 : 14 - 24
  • [38] Parallel Hydrological Model Parameter Uncertainty Analysis Based on Message-Passing Interface
    Yin, Zhaokai
    Liao, Weihong
    Lei, Xiaohui
    Wang, Hao
    WATER, 2020, 12 (10) : 1 - 14
  • [39] Uncertainty assessment of the agro-hydrological SWAP model application at field scale: A case study in a dry region
    Shafiei, Mojtaba
    Ghahraman, Bijan
    Saghafian, Bahram
    Davary, Kamran
    Pande, Saket
    Vazifedoust, Majid
    AGRICULTURAL WATER MANAGEMENT, 2014, 146 : 324 - 334
  • [40] The comparative study of multi-site uncertainty evaluation method based on SWAT model
    Zhang, Jing
    Li, Qiannan
    Guo, Binbin
    Gong, Huili
    HYDROLOGICAL PROCESSES, 2015, 29 (13) : 2994 - 3009