MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3196867077 · doi:10.1029/2020wr028393

Incorporating Uncertainty Into Multiscale Parameter Regionalization to Evaluate the Performance of Nationally Consistent Parameter Fields for a Hydrological Model

2021· article· en· W3196867077 on OpenAlexaff
Rosanna Lane, Jim Freer, Gemma Coxon, Thorsten Wagener

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Resources Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilNatural Environment Research CouncilSight Research UK
KeywordsParameter spaceHydrographEstimation theoryCalibrationField (mathematics)Spatial variabilityRepresentation (politics)Scale (ratio)Computer scienceUncertainty analysisHydrological modellingEnvironmental scienceDrainage basinStatisticsMathematicsGeologyGeographyCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Spatial parameter fields are required to model hydrological processes across diverse landscapes. Transfer functions are often used to relate parameters to spatial catchment attributes, introducing large uncertainties. Quantifying these uncertainties remains a key challenge for large‐scale modeling. This paper extends the multiscale parameter regionalization (MPR) technique to consider parameter uncertainties. We evaluate this method of producing nationally consistent parameter fields, which maintain a constant relationship between model parameters and catchment attributes, across 437 catchments in Great Britain (GB). By sampling multiple transfer function parameters, we produce thousands of possible model parameter fields which are constrained within an uncertainty framework. This is compared to spatially homogeneous parameter sets constrained for individual catchments. The nationally consistent MPR parameter fields perform well (KGE* > 0.75) across 60% of catchments. Performance is similar or better than catchment‐constrained parameters (KGE* drop < 0.1) across 82% of catchments. Advantages of our national parameter fields include (a) improved representation of flows within catchments, (b) more robust performance between calibration and evaluation periods, and (c) spatial parameter fields reflecting hydrologically meaningful variation in catchment characteristics. By including uncertainties, we show that hydrographs produced using MPR have smaller uncertainty bounds which are better able to encompass flows. As the first application of MPR to both the DECIPHeR modeling framework and GB, we developed transfer functions and identified key catchment attributes to constrain model parameters, which are transferrable to other models alongside the addition of uncertainty. Methodologies presented here are informative for future regionalization efforts in GB and elsewhere.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.074
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.257 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations39
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWater Resources ResearchSame topicHydrology and Watershed Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207