Advancement of a Blended Hydrologic Model for Robust Model Performance

AbstractA blended model structure has emerged as an alternative to the traditional representation of model structure in a hydrologic model, in which multiple algorithmic choices are used to represent some hydrologic process within a model, and are combined within a single model run using a weighted...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of hydrologic engineering 2024-10, Vol.29 (5)
Hauptverfasser: Chlumsky, Robert, Mai, Juliane, Craig, James R., Tolson, Bryan A.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue 5
container_start_page
container_title Journal of hydrologic engineering
container_volume 29
creator Chlumsky, Robert
Mai, Juliane
Craig, James R.
Tolson, Bryan A.
description AbstractA blended model structure has emerged as an alternative to the traditional representation of model structure in a hydrologic model, in which multiple algorithmic choices are used to represent some hydrologic process within a model, and are combined within a single model run using a weighted average of process fluxes. This approach has been shown to improve overall model performance, as well as provide an efficient way to test multiple model structures. We propose that a blended model may also be at least a partial solution to the calls for a more robust Community Hydrologic Model, which can mitigate the need for developing new hydrologic models for each catchment and application. We develop an updated version of the blended model configuration that defines the suite of all possible hydrologic process options in the blended model. Configuration development was guided by model performance for more than 30 different discrete model configurations across 12 Model Parameter Estimation Experiment (MOPEX) catchments. Improvements to the blended model include the introduction of blended potential melt and potential evapotranspiration as new process groups, inclusion of nonblended structural changes, and a revision of the process options within each existing group. This leads to a very high-performing model with a mean calibration Kling–Gupta efficiency (KGE) score of 0.90 and mean validation KGE score of 0.80 across all 12 MOPEX catchments, a substantial improvement in model performance relative to the initial version. We tested for overfitting of models and found little statistical evidence that increasing the complexity of blended models reduces validation performance. We then selected the preferred model configuration as Version 2 of the blended model and tested it with 24 independent catchments against the original configuration. This test showed a statistically significant improvement or statistically similar performance in 22 of the 24 catchments in calibration and 21 of the 24 catchments in validation. The results also suggested a greater improvement in drier catchments. Version 2 of the blended model is robust across a range of catchments without the need for adjusting its flexible model structure and may be useful in future hydrology studies and applications alike.
doi_str_mv 10.1061/JHYEFF.HEENG-6246
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_3085094202</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3085094202</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a248t-993a3045627ac81075258d9adf2237e0dc4f538b7533236ac0ef019a0980e0753</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kEtPwzAQhC0EEqXwA7hF4pyyfiX2sVRJAyoPIThwstzYQa3SuNgpUv89LqnEidPujmZmpQ-hawwTDBm-fag-irKcVEXxNE8zwrITNMKS0ZRzwU7jDoKlkEl5ji5CWANgFo8RKqfmW3e13diuT1yT6OSutZ2xJqn2xrvWfa7q5NEZ2yaN88mrW-5CfxRerI_a5hC_RGeNboO9Os4xei-Lt1mVLp7n97PpItWEiT6VkmoKjGck17XAkHPChZHaNITQ3IKpWcOpWOacUkIzXYNtAEsNUoCNbjpGN0Pv1ruvnQ29Wrud7-JLRUFwkIwAiS48uGrvQvC2UVu_2mi_VxjUAZcacKlfXOqAK2YmQ0aH2v61_h_4AaJhasU</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3085094202</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Advancement of a Blended Hydrologic Model for Robust Model Performance</title><source>American Society of Civil Engineers:NESLI2:Journals:2014</source><creator>Chlumsky, Robert ; Mai, Juliane ; Craig, James R. ; Tolson, Bryan A.</creator><creatorcontrib>Chlumsky, Robert ; Mai, Juliane ; Craig, James R. ; Tolson, Bryan A.</creatorcontrib><description>AbstractA blended model structure has emerged as an alternative to the traditional representation of model structure in a hydrologic model, in which multiple algorithmic choices are used to represent some hydrologic process within a model, and are combined within a single model run using a weighted average of process fluxes. This approach has been shown to improve overall model performance, as well as provide an efficient way to test multiple model structures. We propose that a blended model may also be at least a partial solution to the calls for a more robust Community Hydrologic Model, which can mitigate the need for developing new hydrologic models for each catchment and application. We develop an updated version of the blended model configuration that defines the suite of all possible hydrologic process options in the blended model. Configuration development was guided by model performance for more than 30 different discrete model configurations across 12 Model Parameter Estimation Experiment (MOPEX) catchments. Improvements to the blended model include the introduction of blended potential melt and potential evapotranspiration as new process groups, inclusion of nonblended structural changes, and a revision of the process options within each existing group. This leads to a very high-performing model with a mean calibration Kling–Gupta efficiency (KGE) score of 0.90 and mean validation KGE score of 0.80 across all 12 MOPEX catchments, a substantial improvement in model performance relative to the initial version. We tested for overfitting of models and found little statistical evidence that increasing the complexity of blended models reduces validation performance. We then selected the preferred model configuration as Version 2 of the blended model and tested it with 24 independent catchments against the original configuration. This test showed a statistically significant improvement or statistically similar performance in 22 of the 24 catchments in calibration and 21 of the 24 catchments in validation. The results also suggested a greater improvement in drier catchments. Version 2 of the blended model is robust across a range of catchments without the need for adjusting its flexible model structure and may be useful in future hydrology studies and applications alike.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1084-0699</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1943-5584</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1061/JHYEFF.HEENG-6246</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: American Society of Civil Engineers</publisher><subject>Calibration ; Catchment area ; Catchments ; Configuration management ; Evapotranspiration ; Evapotranspiration processes ; Hydrologic models ; Hydrologic processes ; Hydrology ; Mean ; Parameter estimation ; Potential evapotranspiration ; Robustness (mathematics) ; Statistical analysis ; Statistical models ; Technical Papers</subject><ispartof>Journal of hydrologic engineering, 2024-10, Vol.29 (5)</ispartof><rights>2024 American Society of Civil Engineers</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-a248t-993a3045627ac81075258d9adf2237e0dc4f538b7533236ac0ef019a0980e0753</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-2715-7166 ; 0000-0002-1303-5064</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttp://ascelibrary.org/doi/pdf/10.1061/JHYEFF.HEENG-6246$$EPDF$$P50$$Gasce$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttp://ascelibrary.org/doi/abs/10.1061/JHYEFF.HEENG-6246$$EHTML$$P50$$Gasce$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,76193,76201</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Chlumsky, Robert</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mai, Juliane</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Craig, James R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tolson, Bryan A.</creatorcontrib><title>Advancement of a Blended Hydrologic Model for Robust Model Performance</title><title>Journal of hydrologic engineering</title><description>AbstractA blended model structure has emerged as an alternative to the traditional representation of model structure in a hydrologic model, in which multiple algorithmic choices are used to represent some hydrologic process within a model, and are combined within a single model run using a weighted average of process fluxes. This approach has been shown to improve overall model performance, as well as provide an efficient way to test multiple model structures. We propose that a blended model may also be at least a partial solution to the calls for a more robust Community Hydrologic Model, which can mitigate the need for developing new hydrologic models for each catchment and application. We develop an updated version of the blended model configuration that defines the suite of all possible hydrologic process options in the blended model. Configuration development was guided by model performance for more than 30 different discrete model configurations across 12 Model Parameter Estimation Experiment (MOPEX) catchments. Improvements to the blended model include the introduction of blended potential melt and potential evapotranspiration as new process groups, inclusion of nonblended structural changes, and a revision of the process options within each existing group. This leads to a very high-performing model with a mean calibration Kling–Gupta efficiency (KGE) score of 0.90 and mean validation KGE score of 0.80 across all 12 MOPEX catchments, a substantial improvement in model performance relative to the initial version. We tested for overfitting of models and found little statistical evidence that increasing the complexity of blended models reduces validation performance. We then selected the preferred model configuration as Version 2 of the blended model and tested it with 24 independent catchments against the original configuration. This test showed a statistically significant improvement or statistically similar performance in 22 of the 24 catchments in calibration and 21 of the 24 catchments in validation. The results also suggested a greater improvement in drier catchments. Version 2 of the blended model is robust across a range of catchments without the need for adjusting its flexible model structure and may be useful in future hydrology studies and applications alike.</description><subject>Calibration</subject><subject>Catchment area</subject><subject>Catchments</subject><subject>Configuration management</subject><subject>Evapotranspiration</subject><subject>Evapotranspiration processes</subject><subject>Hydrologic models</subject><subject>Hydrologic processes</subject><subject>Hydrology</subject><subject>Mean</subject><subject>Parameter estimation</subject><subject>Potential evapotranspiration</subject><subject>Robustness (mathematics)</subject><subject>Statistical analysis</subject><subject>Statistical models</subject><subject>Technical Papers</subject><issn>1084-0699</issn><issn>1943-5584</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kEtPwzAQhC0EEqXwA7hF4pyyfiX2sVRJAyoPIThwstzYQa3SuNgpUv89LqnEidPujmZmpQ-hawwTDBm-fag-irKcVEXxNE8zwrITNMKS0ZRzwU7jDoKlkEl5ji5CWANgFo8RKqfmW3e13diuT1yT6OSutZ2xJqn2xrvWfa7q5NEZ2yaN88mrW-5CfxRerI_a5hC_RGeNboO9Os4xei-Lt1mVLp7n97PpItWEiT6VkmoKjGck17XAkHPChZHaNITQ3IKpWcOpWOacUkIzXYNtAEsNUoCNbjpGN0Pv1ruvnQ29Wrud7-JLRUFwkIwAiS48uGrvQvC2UVu_2mi_VxjUAZcacKlfXOqAK2YmQ0aH2v61_h_4AaJhasU</recordid><startdate>20241001</startdate><enddate>20241001</enddate><creator>Chlumsky, Robert</creator><creator>Mai, Juliane</creator><creator>Craig, James R.</creator><creator>Tolson, Bryan A.</creator><general>American Society of Civil Engineers</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QH</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H96</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>L.G</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2715-7166</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1303-5064</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20241001</creationdate><title>Advancement of a Blended Hydrologic Model for Robust Model Performance</title><author>Chlumsky, Robert ; Mai, Juliane ; Craig, James R. ; Tolson, Bryan A.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a248t-993a3045627ac81075258d9adf2237e0dc4f538b7533236ac0ef019a0980e0753</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Calibration</topic><topic>Catchment area</topic><topic>Catchments</topic><topic>Configuration management</topic><topic>Evapotranspiration</topic><topic>Evapotranspiration processes</topic><topic>Hydrologic models</topic><topic>Hydrologic processes</topic><topic>Hydrology</topic><topic>Mean</topic><topic>Parameter estimation</topic><topic>Potential evapotranspiration</topic><topic>Robustness (mathematics)</topic><topic>Statistical analysis</topic><topic>Statistical models</topic><topic>Technical Papers</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Chlumsky, Robert</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mai, Juliane</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Craig, James R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tolson, Bryan A.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Aqualine</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 2: Ocean Technology, Policy &amp; Non-Living Resources</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><jtitle>Journal of hydrologic engineering</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Chlumsky, Robert</au><au>Mai, Juliane</au><au>Craig, James R.</au><au>Tolson, Bryan A.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Advancement of a Blended Hydrologic Model for Robust Model Performance</atitle><jtitle>Journal of hydrologic engineering</jtitle><date>2024-10-01</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>29</volume><issue>5</issue><issn>1084-0699</issn><eissn>1943-5584</eissn><abstract>AbstractA blended model structure has emerged as an alternative to the traditional representation of model structure in a hydrologic model, in which multiple algorithmic choices are used to represent some hydrologic process within a model, and are combined within a single model run using a weighted average of process fluxes. This approach has been shown to improve overall model performance, as well as provide an efficient way to test multiple model structures. We propose that a blended model may also be at least a partial solution to the calls for a more robust Community Hydrologic Model, which can mitigate the need for developing new hydrologic models for each catchment and application. We develop an updated version of the blended model configuration that defines the suite of all possible hydrologic process options in the blended model. Configuration development was guided by model performance for more than 30 different discrete model configurations across 12 Model Parameter Estimation Experiment (MOPEX) catchments. Improvements to the blended model include the introduction of blended potential melt and potential evapotranspiration as new process groups, inclusion of nonblended structural changes, and a revision of the process options within each existing group. This leads to a very high-performing model with a mean calibration Kling–Gupta efficiency (KGE) score of 0.90 and mean validation KGE score of 0.80 across all 12 MOPEX catchments, a substantial improvement in model performance relative to the initial version. We tested for overfitting of models and found little statistical evidence that increasing the complexity of blended models reduces validation performance. We then selected the preferred model configuration as Version 2 of the blended model and tested it with 24 independent catchments against the original configuration. This test showed a statistically significant improvement or statistically similar performance in 22 of the 24 catchments in calibration and 21 of the 24 catchments in validation. The results also suggested a greater improvement in drier catchments. Version 2 of the blended model is robust across a range of catchments without the need for adjusting its flexible model structure and may be useful in future hydrology studies and applications alike.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>American Society of Civil Engineers</pub><doi>10.1061/JHYEFF.HEENG-6246</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2715-7166</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1303-5064</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1084-0699
ispartof Journal of hydrologic engineering, 2024-10, Vol.29 (5)
issn 1084-0699
1943-5584
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_3085094202
source American Society of Civil Engineers:NESLI2:Journals:2014
subjects Calibration
Catchment area
Catchments
Configuration management
Evapotranspiration
Evapotranspiration processes
Hydrologic models
Hydrologic processes
Hydrology
Mean
Parameter estimation
Potential evapotranspiration
Robustness (mathematics)
Statistical analysis
Statistical models
Technical Papers
title Advancement of a Blended Hydrologic Model for Robust Model Performance
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-07T12%3A25%3A58IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Advancement%20of%20a%20Blended%20Hydrologic%20Model%20for%20Robust%20Model%20Performance&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20hydrologic%20engineering&rft.au=Chlumsky,%20Robert&rft.date=2024-10-01&rft.volume=29&rft.issue=5&rft.issn=1084-0699&rft.eissn=1943-5584&rft_id=info:doi/10.1061/JHYEFF.HEENG-6246&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3085094202%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3085094202&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true