Uncertainty analysis of a spatially-distributed hydrological model with rainfall multipliers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper has developed an input error model to account for input uncertainty, and applied the rainfall multiplier approaches to the calibration and uncertainty analysis of Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT), a spatially-distributed hydrological model. The developed input error model has introduced the season-dependent rainfall multipliers to the Bayesian framework and reduced the dimension of the posterior probability density function. The method is applied to a watershed located in Southwestern Ontario, Canada. The results of the developed method are compared with two other methods. The SWAT model parameters and the input error model parameters are jointly inferred by a Markov chain Monte Carlo sampler. The results show the measured precipitation data overestimates the true precipitation values for the study area. The uncertainty in model prediction is underestimated for high flows and overestimated for low flows. There is no significant change in the estimation of parameter uncertainty and streamflow prediction uncertainty in the developed method from those in the other methods. The study emphasizes that the rainfall multiplier approaches are applicable to spatially-distributed hydrological modelling for accounting of input uncertainty.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".