On the assessment of water resources model predictions
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18537/mskn.02.01.04Keywords:
hydrologic-hydraulic modelling, model performance, statistic, calibration, evaluation, validation, uncertainty, Monte Carlo simulationsAbstract
En el contexto de modelación hidrológica/hidráulica, este artículo describe el análisis de los estadísticos de calidad de modelación empleados con mayor frecuencia en publicaciones científicas. El análisis se basó en el examen de los estadísticos y su aplicación en el contexto de modelación hidrológica. Así, estos estadísticos se clasificaron en dos grandes grupos de acuerdo al tipo de error que los mismos son capaces de percibir: (i) estadísticos que miden el error sistemático medio; y (ii) estadísticos que miden la combinación de los errores sistemático y aleatorio. De esta forma, el lector está en capacidad de seleccionar un grupo de estadísticos que midan información diferente de la población de errores (o residuos de modelación). El artículo se ocupa además de las debilidades principales de los estadísticos más populares, citados en la literatura científica, y sugiere algunas aproximaciones que podrían emplearse para mitigar dichas debilidades al momento de evaluar la calidad de la modelación numérica.
Downloads
Metrics
References
Abbaspour, K.C., M.T. van Genuchten, R. Schulin, E. Schläppi, 1997. A sequential uncertainty domain inverse procedure for estimating subsurface flow and transport parameters. Water Resour. Res., 33(8), 1879-1892.
Abbott, M.B., J.C. Bathurst, P.E. Cunge, P.E., O’Connell, J. Rasmussen, 1986. An introduction to the European Hydrological System Système Hydrologique Européen, ‘SHE’, 1. History and philosophy of a physically based distributed modeling system. J. Hydrol., 87, 45-59.
Beven, K.J., 1993. Prophecy, reality and uncertainty in distributed hydrological modeling. Adv. Water Resourc., 16, 41-51.
Beven, K.J., 1997. TOPMODEL: A critique. Hydrol. Process., 11(9), 1069-1085.
Binley, A.M., K.J. Beven, A. Calver, L.G. Watts, 1991. Changing Responses in Hydrology: Assessing the Uncertainty in Physically Based Model Predictions. Water Resour. Res., 27(6), 1253-1261.
Braud, I., P. Fernandez, F. Bouraoui, 1999. Study of the rainfall-runoff process in the Andes region using a continuous distributed model. J. Hydrol., 216(3-4), 155-171.
Buytaert, W., B. De Bièvre, G. Wyseure, J. Deckers, 2004. The use of the linear reservoir concept to quantify the impact of land use changes on the hydrology of catchments in the Ecuadorian Andes. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sc., 8, 108-114.
Buytaert, W., V. Iñegues, R. Célleri, B. De Bièvre, 2006. The impact of pine plantations on water yield: a case study from the Ecuadorian Andes. 3rd Int. Symp. on Int. Water Manage., Bochum, Germany.
Feyen, L., R.F. Vazquez, K., Christiaens, O. Sels, J. Feyen, 2000. Application of a distributed physically-based hydrological model to a medium size catchment. Hydrol. Earth Sys. Sci., 4(1), 47-63.
Fleischbein, K., W. Wilcke, C. Valarezo, W. Zech, K. Knoblich, 2006. Water budgets of three small catchments under montane forest in Ecuador: experimental and modeling approach. Hydrol. Process., 20, 2491-2507.
Freeze, R.A., R.L. Harlan, 1969. Blueprint for a physically based digitally simulated hydrologic response model. J. Hydrol., 9, 237-258.
Grayson, R.B., I.D. Moore, T.A. McHanon, 1992. Physically-based hydrological modelling: a terrain-based model for investigative purposes. Water Resour. Res., 28(10), 2639-2658.
Legates, D.R., G.J. McCabe, 1999. Evaluating the use of 'goodness-of-fit' measures in hydrological and hydroclimatic model validation. Water Resour. Res., 35(1), 233-241.
Loague, K., R.E. Green, 1991. Statistical and graphical methods for evaluating solute transport models: overview and applications. J. Contam. Hydrol., 7, 51-73.
Nash, J.E., J.V. Sutcliffe, 1970. River flow forecasting through conceptual models. Part I: A discussion of principles. J. Hydrol., 10(3), 282-290.
Perrin, J.L., C. Bouvier, J.L. Janeau, G. Menez, F. Cruz, 2001. Rainfall/runoff processes in a small peri-urban catchment in the Andes mountains. The Rumihurcu Quebrada, Quito (Ecuador). Hydrol. Process., 15(5), 843-854.
Refsgaard, J.C. 1997. Parameterisation, calibration and validation of distributed hydrological models. J. Hydrol., 198, 69-97.
Refsgaard, J.C., B. Storm, 1995. MIKE SHE. In Singh, V.P. (Ed.). Computer Models of Watershed Hydrology. Water Resources Publications, Colorado, USA, 809-846.
Refsgaard, J.C., B. Storm, 1996. Construction, calibration and validation of hydrological models. In: Abbott, M.B. and Refsgaard , J.C. (Eds.), Distributed Hydrological Modelling, Kluwer Academic, The Netherlands, 41-54.
Salas, J.D., 1993. Analysis and modelling of hydrologic timeseries. In: Maidment, D.R. (Ed.), Handbook of hydrology, McGraw-Hill Inc., USA, 19.1-19.71.
Vázquez, R.F., 2003. Assessment of the performance of physically based distributed codes simulating medium size hydrological systems. Tesis Ph.D. ISBN 90-5682-416-3, K.U.Leuven, Bélgica, 335 págs.
Vázquez, R.F., J. Feyen, 2007. Assessment of the effects of DEM gridding on the predictions of basin runoff using MIKE SHE and a modelling resolution of 600 m. J. Hydrol., 334, 73- 87.
Vázquez, R.F., J. Feyen, 2008. Application of distributed hydrologic models. En: Pilar García-Navarro, P., E. Playán (Eds.): Numerical modelling of Hydrodynamics for Water Resources. Taylor & Francis, Londres, Reino Unido, 153-174.
Vázquez, R.F., P. Willems, J. Feyen, 2008. Improving the predictions of a MIKE SHE catchment-scale application by using multi-criteria approach. Hydrol. Process., 22(13), 2159-2179.
Vázquez, R.F., K. Beven, J. Feyen, 2009. GLUE based assessment on the overall predictions of a MIKE SHE application. Water Resour. Manag., 23(7), 1325-1349.
Vázquez, R.F., L. Feyen, J. Feyen, J.C. Refsgaard, 2002. Effect of grid-size on effective parameters and model performance of the MIKE SHE code applied to a medium sized catchment. Hydrol. Process., 16(2), 355-372.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright © Autors. Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. for any article submitted from 6 June 2017 onwards. For manuscripts submitted before, the CC BY 3.0 License was used.
You are free to:
 |
Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format |
 |
Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially. |
Under the following conditions:
 |
Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the licence, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licenser endorses you or your use. |
| No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the licence permits. |
