Technical note: RAT – a robustness assessment test for calibrated and uncalibrated hydrological models
-
Published:2021-09-17
Issue:9
Volume:25
Page:5013-5027
-
ISSN:1607-7938
-
Container-title:Hydrology and Earth System Sciences
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci.
Author:
Nicolle PierreORCID, Andréassian VazkenORCID, Royer-Gaspard Paul, Perrin Charles, Thirel GuillaumeORCID, Coron Laurent, Santos LéonardORCID
Abstract
Abstract. Prior to their use under future changing climate conditions, all
hydrological models should be thoroughly evaluated regarding their temporal
transferability (application in different time periods) and extrapolation
capacity (application beyond the range of known past conditions). This note
presents a straightforward evaluation framework aimed at detecting potential
undesirable climate dependencies in hydrological models: the robustness
assessment test (RAT). Although it is conceptually inspired by the classic
differential split-sample test of Klemeš (1986), the RAT presents the
advantage of being applicable to all types of models, be they calibrated or not
(i.e. regionalized or physically based). In this note, we present the RAT,
illustrate its application on a set of 21 catchments, verify its
applicability hypotheses and compare it to previously published tests.
Results show that the RAT is an efficient evaluation approach, passing it
successfully can be considered a prerequisite for any hydrological model to
be used for climate change impact studies.
Funder
Horizon 2020 Agence Nationale de la Recherche
Publisher
Copernicus GmbH
Subject
General Earth and Planetary Sciences,General Engineering,General Environmental Science
Reference60 articles.
1. Andréassian, V., Perrin, C., Berthet, L., Le Moine, N., Lerat, J., Loumagne, C., Oudin, L., Mathevet, T., Ramos, M.-H., and Valéry, A.: HESS Opinions ”Crash tests for a standardized evaluation of hydrological models”, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 13, 1757–1764, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-13-1757-2009, 2009. 2. Andréassian, V., Le Moine, N., Perrin, C., Ramos, M.-H., Oudin, L.,
Mathevet, T., Lerat, J., and Berthet, L.: All that glitters is not gold: the case
of calibrating hydrological models, Hydrol Process., 26, 2206–2210,
https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.9264, 2012. 3. Arlot, S. and Celisse, A. A survey of cross-validation procedures for model
selection, Stat Surv., 4, 40–79, https://doi.org/10.1214/09-SS054, 2010. 4. Bellprat, O., Kotlarski, S., Lüthi, D., and Schär, C.: Physical
constraints for temperature biases in climate models: limits of temperature
biases, Geophys. Res. Lett., 40, 4042–4047, https://doi.org/10.1002/grl.50737, 2013. 5. Beven, K.: Facets of uncertainty: epistemic uncertainty, non-stationarity,
likelihood, hypothesis testing, and communication, Hydrol. Sci. J., 61,
1652–1665, https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2015.1031761, 2016.
Cited by
5 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|