Improvement of Rainfall-Runoff Simulations Using the Runoff-Scale Weighting Method
Publication: Journal of Hydrologic Engineering
Volume 19, Issue 7
Abstract
Objective selection and tradeoffs have always been key central issues in rainfall-runoff models. In general, precision for high and low flows cannot be achieved or considered concurrently. Combination forecasts are potentially capable of producing more suitable or superior results through appropriate methods. In this study, we propose an automatic method, a runoff-scale weighting method (RSWM), to solve issues regarding flow precision trade-offs. Objective functions that emphasize precision at various flows were used to conduct combination forecasts and validate the effectiveness of this method. The results indicated that combination forecasting is capable of improving precision during all flow stages to further enhance model effectiveness. In addition, we used the fuzzy multiobjective function simple-average (FMOF-SA) and fuzzy multiobjective function-low (FMOF-low) as reference flows to test the robustness of parameters to determine whether the RSWM is affected by reference flows. The results indicated that the FMOF-low is relatively more robust than the FMOF-SA, although both had only a slight influence on the final results. According to the final results, the mean absolute relative residual of most flow stages is approximately 0.2, which shows that the RSWM can be applied to various runoff conditions.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the reviewers for their thorough review and constructive suggestions. We would also like to thank the Taiwan Water Resources Agency for providing hydrological data of the study area.
References
Ajami, N. K., Duan, Q., Gao, X., and Sorooshian, S. (2006). “Multimodel combination techniques for hydrologic forecasting: Application to distributed model intercomparison project results.” J. Hydrometeorol., 7(4), 755–768.
Bates, J. M., and Granger, C. W. J. (1969). “The combination of forecasts.” Oper. Res. Q., 20(4), 451–468.
Beven, K. (2001). Rainfall-Runoff modeling, the primer, Wiley, Chichester, U.K., 1–360.
Chen, R., Pi, L., and Hsieh, C. (2005). “Application of parameter optimization method for calibrating tank model.” J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc., 41(2), 389–402.
Clemen, R. T., Murphy, A. H., and Winkler, R. L. (1995). “Screening probability forecasts: Contrasts between choosing and combining.” Int. J. Forecast., 11(1), 133–146.
Diebold, F. X., and Pauly, P. (1987). “Structural change and the combination of forecasts.” J. Forecast., 6(1), 21–40.
Diskin, M. H., and Simon, E. (1977). “A procedure for the selection of objective functions for hydrologic simulation models.” J. Hydrol., 34(1–2), 129–149.
Duan, Q., Gupta, V. K., and Sorooshian, S. (1993). “A shuffled complex evolution approach for effective and efficient global minimization.” J. Optim. Theory Appl., 76(3), 501–521.
Duan, Q., Sorooshian, S., and Gupta, V. K. (1992). “Effective and efficient global optimization for conceptual rainfall–runoff models.” Water Resour. Res., 28(4), 1015–1031.
Duan, Q., Sorooshian, S., and Gupta, V. K. (1994). “Optimal use of the SCE-UA global optimization method for calibrating watershed models.” J. Hydrol., 158(3–4), 265–284.
Dubois, D., and Prade, H. (1978). “Operations on fuzzy numbers.” Int. J. Syst. Sci., 9(6), 613–626.
Efstratiadis, A., and Koutsoyiannis, D. (2010). “One decade of multi-objective calibration approaches in hydrological modelling: A review.” J. Hydrol. Sci., 55(1), 58–78.
Green, I. R. A., and Stephenson, D. (1986). “Criteria for comparison of single event models.” J. Hydrol. Sci., 31(3), 395–411.
Gupta, H. V., Beven, K., and Wagener, T. (2005). “Model calibration and uncertainty estimation.” Encycl. Hydrol. Sci., 11(131), 1–17.
Jeong, D. I., and Kim, Y. O. (2009). “Combining single-value streamflow forecasts—A review and guidelines for selecting techniques.” J. Hydrol., 377(3–4), 284–299.
Keufmann, A., and Gupta, M. M. (1991). Introduction to fuzzy arithmetic: Theory and application, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York.
Kim, Y. O., Jeong, D. I., and Ko, I. H. (2006). “Combining rainfall-runoff model outputs for improving ensemble streamflow prediction.” J. Hydrol. Eng., 578–588.
Kobayashi, S., and Maruyama, T. (1976). “Search for the coefficients of the reservoir model with the Powell’s conjugate direction method.” Trans. Jpn. Soc. Irrig. Drain. Reclam. Eng., 65, 42–47 (in Japanese).
Lee, H., McIntyre, N., Wheater, H., and Young, A. (2005). “Selection of conceptual models for regionalisation of the rainfall-runoff relationship.” J. Hydrol., 312(1–4), 125–147.
Liu, T. M., Tung, C. P., Ke, K. Y., Chuang, L. H., and Lin, C. Y. (2009). “Application and development of a decision-support system for assessing water shortage and allocation with climate change.” Paddy Water Environ., 7(4), 301–311.
Madsen, H. (2000). “Automatic calibration of a conceptual rainfall-runoff model using multiple objectives.” J. Hydrol., 235(3–4), 276–288.
Nash, J. E., and Sutcliffe, J. V. (1970). “River flow forecasting through conceptual models. I: A discussion of principles.” J. Hydrol., 10(3), 282–290.
Pechlivanidis, I. G., Jackson, B., McIntyre, N., and Wheater, H. S. (2011). “Catchment scale hydrological modelling: A review of model types, calibration approaches and uncertainty analysis methods in the context of recent developments in technology and applications.” Global NEST J., 13(3), 193–214.
Powell, M. J. D. (1964). “An efficient method for finding the minimum of a function of several variables without calculating derivatives.” Comput. J., 7(2), 155–162.
Schaefli, B., and Gupta, H. (2007). “Do Nash values have value?” Hydrol. Processes, 21(15), 2075–2080.
Servat, E., and Dezetter, A. (1993). “Rainfall–runoff modelling and water resources assessment in northwestern Ivory Coast. Tentative extension to ungauged catchment.” J. Hydrol., 148(1–4), 231–248.
Sugawara, M. (1995). “Tank model.” Computer models of watershed hydrology, Water Resources Publishers, Baton Rouge, LA, 165–214.
Tanakamaru, H. (1995). “Parameter estimation for the tank model using global optimization.” Trans. Jpn. Soc. Irrig. Drain. Reclam. Eng., 178, 103–112 (in Japanese).
Water Resources Agency (WRA). (2002). “A study on the automatic calibration method of the tank model.” Water Resources Agency, Ministry of Economic Affairs, Executive Yuan, Taiwan (in Chinese).
Water Resources Agency (WRA). (2008). “Strengthening sustainable water resources utilization and adaptive capacity to climate change (2/2).” Water Resources Agency, Ministry of Economic Affairs, Executive Yuan, Taiwan (in Chinese).
Water Resources Agency (WRA). (2011). “Strengthening water supply system adaptive capacity to climate change in southern region (2/2).” Water Resources Agency, Ministry of Economic Affairs, Executive Yuan, Taiwan (in Chinese).
Yapo, P. O., Gupta, H. V., and Sorooshian, S. (1996). “Automatic calibration of conceptual rainfall–runoff models: Sensitivity to calibration data.” J. Hydrol., 181(1–4), 23–48.
Yu, P. S., and Yang, T. C. (2000). “Fuzzy multi-objective function for rainfall-runoff model calibration.” J. Hydrol., 238(1–2), 1–14.
Zou, H., and Yang, Y. (2004). “Combining time series models for forecasting.” Int. J. Forecast., 20(1), 69–84.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Hydrologic Engineering
Volume 19 • Issue 7 • July 2014
Pages: 1330 - 1339
Copyright
© 2013 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Feb 5, 2013
Accepted: Oct 14, 2013
Published online: Oct 16, 2013
Discussion open until: Mar 16, 2014
Published in print: Jul 1, 2014
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.