High resolution data for semi-distributed hydrological modeling: where should we draw the line?
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
High-resolution data are readily available and used more than ever in hydrological modeling, despite few investigations demonstrating the added value. Nonetheless, a few studies have looked into the benefits of using increased spatial resolution data with the widely-used, semi-distributed, SWAT model. Meanwhile, far too little attention has been paid to the physically-based, semi-distributed, hydrological model HYDROTEL which is widely used for hydrological forecasting and hydroclimatic studies in Quebec, Canada. In a preliminary study, we demonstrated that increasing the spatial resolution of the digital elevation model (DEM) had a significant impact on the discretization of a watershed into hillslopes (i.e., computational units of HYDROTEL), and on their topographic attributes (slope, elevation and area). Accordingly, values of the calibration parameters were also substantially affected; whereas model performance was slightly improved for high- and low-flows only. This is why, we hereby propose the systematic assessment of HYDROTEL with respect to the resolution of the spatiotemporal computational domain for a specific physiographic scale. This investigation was conducted for the 350-km2 St. Charles River watershed, Quebec, Canada. The DEM used was derived from LiDAR data and aggregated at 20 m. Due to a lack of accurate precipitation information at time scales less than 24 hr, data from the high resolution deterministic precipitation analysis system, CaPA-HRDPA, were used to generate various time steps (6, 8, 12, and 24 hr) and to control results obtained from observed data. This approach, recently applied to three watersheds in Yukon, proved to be an excellent alternative to calibrate a hydrological model in a region known as a hydometeorological desert (see EGU 2020 presentation of Abbasnezhadi and Rousseau). The number of computational units ranged between 5 to 684 hillslopes, with mean areas ranging from 75 km2 to 0.5 km2. HYDROTEL was automatically calibrated over the 2013-2018 period using PADDS. We combined the Kling Gupta Efficiency and the log-transformed Nash Sutcliffe Efficiency to ensure good seasonal and annual representations of the hydrographs. The 12 most sensitive calibration parameters were adjusted using 150 optimisation trials with 150 repetitions each. Behavioral parameters were used to assess uncertainty and ensuing equifinality. All scenarios were evaluated using flow duration curves, performance indicators (RMSE, % Bias) and hydrograph analyses. In addition, quantitative analyses were done with respect to physiographic features such as: length of river segments, hillslopes, and sub-watershed boundaries for each resolution. We believe this study provides the needed systematic framework to assess trade-offs between spatiotemporal resolutions and modeling performances that can be achieved with HYDROTEL. Moreover, the use of various numbers of CaPA-HRDPA stations for model calibration has allowed us to determine the number of precipitation stations needed to achieve a given performance threshold.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,014 | 0,041 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,008 | 0,009 |
| Science ouverte | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,005 | 0,006 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,011 | 0,005 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».