Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.3741/JKWRA.2012.45.9.861

Comparing Prediction Uncertainty Analysis Techniques of SWAT Simulated Streamflow Applied to Chungju Dam Watershed  

Joh, Hyung-Kyung (Weather Information Service Center)
Park, Jong-Yoon (Dept. of Civil and Environmental System Engineering, Konkuk University)
Jang, Cheol-Hee (Hydrologic Cycle Research Team, Korea Institute of Construction Technology)
Kim, Seong-Joon (Dept. of Civil and Environmental System Engineering, Konkuk University)
Publication Information
Journal of Korea Water Resources Association / v.45, no.9, 2012 , pp. 861-874 More about this Journal
Abstract
To fulfill applicability of Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) model, it is important that this model passes through a careful calibration and uncertainty analysis. In recent years, many researchers have come up with various uncertainty analysis techniques for SWAT model. To determine the differences and similarities of typical techniques, we applied three uncertainty analysis procedures to Chungju Dam watershed (6,581.1 $km^2$) of South Korea included in SWAT-Calibration Uncertainty Program (SWAT-CUP): Sequential Uncertainty FItting algorithm ver.2 (SUFI2), Generalized Likelihood Uncertainty Estimation (GLUE), Parameter Solution (ParaSol). As a result, there was no significant difference in the objective function values between SUFI2 and GLUE algorithms. However, ParaSol algorithm shows the worst objective functions, and considerable divergence was also showed in 95PPU bands with each other. The p-factor and r-factor appeared from 0.02 to 0.79 and 0.03 to 0.52 differences in streamflow respectively. In general, the ParaSol algorithm showed the lowest p-factor and r-factor, SUFI2 algorithm was the highest in the p-factor and r-factor. Therefore, in the SWAT model calibration and uncertainty analysis of the automatic methods, we suggest the calibration methods considering p-factor and r-factor. The p-factor means the percentage of observations covered by 95PPU (95 Percent Prediction Uncertainty) band, and r-factor is the average thickness of the 95PPU band.
Keywords
SWAT-CUP; SUFI2; GLUE; ParaSol; Prediction Uncertainty;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Seibert, J., and McDonnell, J.J. (2003). The quest for an improved dialog between modeler and experimentalist. In: Duan, Q., Sorooshian, S., Gupta, H., Rosseau, H., and Turcotte, R. (Eds.). "Calibration of watershed models." Water Science and Applications, Vol. 6, pp. 301-316.   DOI
2 Sophocleous, M.A., Koelliker, J.K., Govindaraju, R.S., Birdie, T., Ramireddygari, S.R., and Perkins, S.P. (1999). "Integrated numerical modeling for basin-wide water management: The case of the rattlesnake creek basin in south-central Kansas." Journal of Hydrology, Vol. 214, No. 1, pp. 179-196.   DOI   ScienceOn
3 van Griensve, A., and Meixner, T. (2006). "Methods to quantify and identify the sources of uncertainty for river basin water quality models." Water Science and Technology, Vol. 53, No. 1, pp. 51-59.   DOI   ScienceOn
4 Vrugt, J.A., Diks, C.G., Bouten, W., Gupta, H.V., and Verstraten, J.M. (2005). "Towards a complete treatment of uncertainty in hydrologic modeling: combining the strength of global optimization and data assimilation." Water Resources Research, Vol. 41. Art. No. W01017, doi: 10.1029/2004WR003059.
5 Yang, J., Reichert, P., Abbaspour, K.C., Xia, J., and Yang, H. (2008). "Comparing uncertainty analysis techniques for a SWAT application to the Chaohe basin in China." Journal of Hydrology, Vol. 358. pp. 1-23.   DOI
6 이효상, 전민우, 발린 다니엘라, 로드 미하엘 (2009). "강우 자료의 확실성을 고려한 강우 유출모형의 적용."한국수자원학회논문집, 한국수자원학회, 제 42권, 제 10호, pp. 773-783.
7 Abbaspour, K.C. (2009). SWAT-CUP user manual. Dept. of System Analysis, Integrated Assessment and Modelling, Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology Duebendorf, Switzerland.
8 Abbaspour, K.C., Yang, J., Maximov, I., Siber, R., Bogner, K., Mieleitner, J., Zobris, J., and Srinivasan, R. (2007). "Modelling hydrology and water quality in the prealpine/ alpine Thur watershed using SWAT." Journal of Hydrology, Vol. 333, pp. 413-430.   DOI
9 Ajami, N.K., Duan, Q.Y., and Sorooshian, S. (2007). "An integrated hydrologic Bayesian multimodal combination framework: confronting input, parameter, and model structural uncertainty in hydrologic prediction." Water Resources Research, Vol. 43, No. 1, Art. No. W01403.
10 Arnold, J.G., and Allen. P.M. (1996). "Estimating hydrologic budgets for three illinois watershed." Journal of Hydrology, Vol. 176, pp. 57-77.   DOI   ScienceOn
11 Beven, K., and Binley, A. (1992). "The future of distributed models-model calibration and uncertainty prediction." Hydrological Process, Vol. 6, No. 3, pp. 279-298.   DOI
12 Arnold, J.G., Srinivasan, R., Muttiah, R.S., and Williams, J.R. (1998). "Large area hydrologic modeling and assessment-Prat 1: Model development." Journal of the American Water Resources Association, JAWRA, Vol. 34, No. 1, pp. 73-89.   DOI   ScienceOn
13 Bastidas, L.A., Gupta, H., Hsu, VK-1., and Sorooshian, S. (2003). Parameter, structure, and model performance evaluation for land-surface schemes. In: Duan, Q., Sorroshian, S., Gupta, H., Rosseau, H., and Turcotte, R. (Eds.). "Calibration of Watershed Models." Water Science and Applications, Vol. 6, pp. 239-254.   DOI
14 Beven, K. (2001). Rainfall-runoff modeling-The primer. John Wiley and Sons.
15 Beven, K., and Freer, J. (2001). "Equifinality, data assimilation, and uncertainty estimation in mechanistic modeling of complex environmental systems using the GLUE methodology." Journal of Hydrology, Vol. 249, No, 1-4. pp. 11-29.   DOI
16 Gupta, H.V., Beven, K.J., and Wagner, T. (2005). "Model calibration and uncertainty estimation." In: Anderson, M.G. (Ed.). "Encyclopedia of Hydrological Science." John Wiley, New York. pp. 2015-2031.
17 Hapuarachchi, H.A.P., Zhijia, L., and Shouhui, W. (2001). "Application of SCE-UA method for Calibrating the Xinanjiang watershed model." Journal of Lake Sciences, Vol. 12, No. 4, pp. 304-314.
18 Hornberger, G.M., and Spear, R.C. (1981). "An approach to the preliminary-analysis of environmental system." Journal of Environmental Management, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 7-18.
19 Jakeman, A.J., and Hornberger, G.M. (1993). "How much complexity is warranted in rainfall-runoff model." Water Resources Research, Vol. 29, No. 8, pp. 2637-2649.   DOI   ScienceOn
20 Kuczera, G., and Mroczkowski, M. (1998). "Assessment of hydrological parameter uncertainty and the worth of multi-response data." Water Resources Research, Vol. 34, pp. 1481-1489.   DOI   ScienceOn
21 Legates, D.R., and McCabe, G.J. (1999). "Evaluating the use of goodness-of-fit measures in hydrologic and model validation." Water Resources Research, Vol. 35, pp. 233-241.   DOI   ScienceOn
22 Manguerra, H.B., and Engel, B.A. (1998). "Hydrologic parameterization of watersheds for runoff prediction using SWAT." Journal of the American Resources Association, JAWRA, Vol. 34, No. 5, pp. 1149-1162.   DOI
23 Moradkahni, H., Hsu, K.L., Gupta, H., and Sorooshian, S. (2005). "Uncertainty assessment of hydrologic model states and parameters: sequential data assimilation using the particle filter." Water Resources Research, Vol. 41, Art. No. W05012, doi: 10.1029.2004WR003604.
24 Nash, J.E., and Sutcliffe, J.V. (1970). River flow forecasting through conceptual models: Part I. "A discussion of principles." Journal of Hydrology, Vol. 10, No. 3, pp. 283-290.
25 Neitsch, S.L., Arnold, J.G., Kiniry, J.R., and Williams, J.R. (2005). Soil and water assessment tool theoretical documentation version 2005: Draft-january 2005. Temple, TX, USA: Grassland, Soil and Water Research Laboratory, Agricultural Research Service, Blackland Research Center, Texas Agricultural Experiment Station.
26 Peterson, J.R., and Hamlett, J.M. (1998). "Hydrologic calibration of the SWAT model in a watershed containing Fragipan soils." Journal of the American Water Resources Association, JAWRA, Vol. 34, No. 3, pp. 531-544.   DOI   ScienceOn
27 Reichert, P., and Mieleitner, J. (2009). "Analyzing input and structural uncertainty of a hydrological model with stochastic, time-dependent parameters." Water Resources Research, Vol. 45, Art. No. W10402. doi: 10.1029/2009WR007814.