Professional Documents
Culture Documents
SJOHCI 2010 v43n12 1011
SJOHCI 2010 v43n12 1011
pp. 10111027
DOI: 10.3741/JKWRA.2010.43.12.1011
--
* / ** / *** / ****
Lee, Gi Ha / Yu, Wan Sik / Jung, Kwan Sue / Cho, Bok Hwan
..............................................................................................................................................................................................
Abstract
In hydrologic modeling, prediction uncertainty generally stems from various uncertainty sources
associated with model structure, data, and parameters, etc. This study aims to assess the parameter uncertainty effect on hydrologic prediction results. For this objective, a distributed rainfall-sediment yield-runoff
model, which consists of rainfall-runoff module for simulation of surface and subsurface flows and
sediment yield module based on unit
stream power theory, was applied to the mesoscale mountainous area
2
(Cheoncheon catchment; 289.9 km ). For parameter uncertainty evaluation, the model was calibrated by a
multi-objective optimization algorithm (MOSCEM) with two different objective functions (RMSE and
HMLE) and Pareto optimal solutions of each case were then estimated. In Case I, the rainfall-runoff module
was calibrated to investigate the effect of parameter uncertainty on hydrograph reproduction whereas in
Case II, sediment yield module was calibrated to show the propagation of parameter uncertainty into
sedigraph estimation. Additionally, in Case III, all parameters of both modules were simultaneously
calibrated in order to take account of prediction uncertainty in rainfall-sediment yield-runoff modeling.
The results showed that hydrograph prediction uncertainty of Case I was observed over the low-flow
periods while the sedigraph of high-flow periods was sensitive to uncertainty of the sediment yield module
parameters in Case II. In Case III, prediction uncertainty ranges of both hydrograph and sedigraph were
larger than the other cases. Furthermore, prediction uncertainty in terms of spatial distribution of erosion
and deposition drastically varied with the applied model parameters for all cases.
Keywords : distributed rainfall-sediment yield-runoff model, parameter uncertainty, prediction uncertainty,
multi-objective optimization, MOSCEM, pareto optimal solution
..............................................................................................................................................................................................
, ,
. - - --
, MOSCEM
*
post-doc
(e-mail: leegiha@gmail.com)
Corresponding Author, Research Associate., Construction and Disaster Research Center, Chungnam National Univ., Daejeon 305-764, Korea
**
(e-mail: yuwansik@gmail.com)
Graduate student. Dept. of Civil Eng., Chungnam National Univ., Daejeon 305-764, Korea
***
(e-mail: ksjung@cnu.ac.kr)
Professor, Dept. of Civil Eng., Chungnam National Univ., Daejeon 305-764, Korea
****
(e-mail: james7799@rocketmail.com)
Engineer, Div. of Water Resources, Korean Engineering Consultants Corp., Seoul 143-715, Korea
43 12 2010 12
1011
- , - (Case I II),
-- (Case III) Pareto ,
. (Case I),
, , (Case II)
. --
Case I II ,
.
: -- , , , , MOSCEM, Pareto
.............................................................................................................................................................................................
1.
( )
. (lumped conceptual model)
(integrated)
,
(Sorooshian and Gupta, 1995).
(physics-based distributed model) , ,
,
. Todini (1988), Wheater et al. (1993),
Vieux(2004)
, ,
, Beven(1989,
2003) Madsen(2003) (measurement
scale) (model grid scale) (incommensurability)
.
, (feasible
parameter range)
GA(genetic algorithm;
Wang, 1991) SCE(shuffled complex evolution; Duan
et al., 1992)
(
, 2002; , 2004).
(single-objective optimization method)
1012
, ,
(Ambroise et al., 1995;
Mroczkowski et al., 1997; Franks et al., 2006). ,
- -
,
SCE
,
.
,
(uncertainty propagation)
.
- -
--
MOSCEM - , ,
--
Pareto
, .
2. --
(Tachikawa et al., 2004)
(unit stream power; Yang, 1972)
(Sayama, 2003)
raster --
.
- DEM
, ,
,
- (kinematic
wave) .
(micropore, )
,
(macropore, )
,
43 12 2010 12
.
Eq. (1) , Eq.
(2) .
(1)
(2)
, , , , ,
(m3/s), (m), ,
(m/s),
(m/s), (m),
(m),
(m-1/3s), ( ), 5/3.
- ,
( )
( )
, ( )
.
Yang(1972)
,
. Eq. (3)
, Eq. (4) (net erosion)
. Fig. 1
.
(3)
(4)
, (kg/m3),
(m), (m3/s), (kg/
m2/hr), ,
,
Eqs. (5) and (6) (Morgan et al, 1998).
(5)
(6)
, (kg/J),
1013
(J/m2), ( ,
/ .
( ) Yang(1972)
, ( )
( ) Eq. (7)
.
(7)
Yang(1973) .
log
(8)
, (ppm), (unit
stream power), ,
, m/s),
(m/s),2 (
(m/s ), (mm).
ArcGIS tool
, ,
250250m
3. MOSCEM
log log
log log log
DEM ,
Vieux(2004)
(WAMIS)
Landsat
.
4( , , , ),
5( , , , , ) 9
(Table 1)
Pareto ,
,
.
3.1 Pareto
.
.
Eq. (9)
.
Table 1. Model Parameters and Feasible Parameter Ranges for Uncertainty Assessment
Parameter
KE
Description
The depth of the unsaturated soil layer (mm)
The depth of the saturated soil layer (mm)
The hydraulic conductivity of the saturated soil layer (m/s)
The non-linear exponent constant for the unsaturated soil layer
The median grain size (mm)
The soil detachability (kg/J)
The detachment or deposition efficiency
The total kinetic energy of the net rainfall (J/m2)
The critical unit stream power (m/s)
(a)
Range of value
50300
1700
0.0010.1
210
110
0.00080.006
0.3351.0
130
0.0020.100
(b)
(c)
, Fig. 2(c)
A B Pareto
. Figs. 2(b) and (c)
, Fig. 2(c)
Pareto rank
. , MOSCEM
, Pareto .
Fig. 2(c) A B A B
()
(),
. Pareto
(group)
(compromise solution or
balanced optimum) .
43 12 2010 12
1015
3.2 MOSCEM
MOSCEM Pareto
SCE
, SCEM(shuffled complex evolution metropolis;
Vrugt et al. 2003a)
, Zitzler and Thiele(1999)
,
SCEM
SCEM (Vrugt et al., 2003b). Fig.
3 MOSCEM
, .
1. ,
( ) .
2. ( )
.
3. ,
.
4.
.
5.
. ,
,
.
6. , SEM(sequence evolution metropolis)
.
SEM
,
.
7.
.
8.
5
.
CMATLAB versionMOSCEMhttp://www.sahra.
arizona.edu
Vrugt et al. (2003b), Bos and Vreng
(2006) . MOSCEM
Pareto ,
.
4.
4.1
-
-
. 289.8km2,
EL. 549.13m 25.5km
.
,
- , -
.
(2002, 2003,
2007) - -
. , ,
, 2
Thiessen
. Fig.
4(a)
, Fig. 4(b)
Thiessen .
4.2 MOSCEM Pareto
(a)
MOSCEM
- (Case I), - (Case II)
,
-- (Case III)
2002
Pareto .
Case I -
RMSE(Root Mean Square Error) HMLE
(Heteroscedastic Maximum Likelihood Estimator;
Sorooshian and Dracup, 1980) -
( , , , ) Pareto
. Case II
- Case I
- ( , , ,
, ) RMSE HMLE
Pareto . Case III,
-- ,
RMSE RMSE,
Pareto
.
RMSE HMLE Eqs. (10) and (11) .
(10)
(b)
Fig. 4. (a) Thiessen Polygons of the Yongdam Dam Basin and (b) Hill-shade Topography of the Study
Site: Cheoncheon Catchment Marked by a Bold Solid Line in Fig. 4(a).
43 12 2010 12
1017
, ,
, .
HMLE HMLE
Duan(1991) HMLE .
exp
(11)
, , ln , =0.3.
MOSCEM (algorithmic parameters) ,
5, (random sample) Yapo et al.
(1998)
500 Case I Case II 3000
(iteration) , Case III
Pareto (convergency)
7000 Pareto
.
4.2.1 Case I: -
Fig. 5 - RMSE HMLE
Pareto Pareto
, , , (normalized parameter value) . Fig. 5(a)
Fig. 5(b)
, Pareto
(Fig. 5(b)
) .
Pareto RMSE 37.2147.35,
HMLE 275.37398.20 ,
RMSE
HMLE 40.61 323.71 .
Pareto
RMSE HMLE
Table 2 .
Uncertainty Range
54.4 286.7 (mm)
1 74.3 (mm)
0.004 0.050 (m/s)
2.016 9.970
(a)
Optimal Parameter
RMSE
HMLE
54.4
253.9
56.2
4.2
0.0065
0.047
2.050
9.936
Compromise
Solution
154.3
2.2
0.025
4.394
(b)
Fig. 5. Parameter Uncertainty Assessment: (a) Pareto Solution and (b) Normalized Optimal Parameter
Sets of Case I
1018
(a)
.
. Pareto
, - Pareto
,
. Pareto
RMSE HMLE
Table 3 .
(b)
Fig. 6. Parameter Uncertainty Assessment: (a) Pareto Solution and (b) Normalized Optimal Parameter
Sets of Case II
Table 3. Parameter Uncertainty Range and the Compromise Solution in Case II
Parameter
43 12 2010 12
Uncertainty Range
9.789.99 (mm)
0.00080.002 (kg/J)
0.3350.401
1.0042.598 (J/m2)
0.09760.1 (m/s)
Optimal Parameter
RMSE
HMLE
9.980
9.987
0.0012
0.001
0.350
0.348
1.775
1.016
0.1
0.0998
Compromise
Solution
9.989
0.001
0.339
1.817
0.0998
1019
(a)
4.3
Case Pareto
(ensemble simulation and prediction)
. Case I (
) Fig. 5(b)
(Fig. 8(a)).
(b)
Fig. 7. Parameter Uncertainty Assessment: (a) Pareto Solution and (b) Normalized Optimal Parameter
Sets of Case III
Table 4. Parameter Uncertainty Range and the Compromise Solution in Case III
Parameter
1020
Uncertainty Range
15.48350.6 (mm)
1.58120.99 (mm)
0.00110.0988 (m/s)
2.0459.703
4.6599.998 (mm)
0.00080.0038 (kg/J)
0.35640.9972
10.01523.626 (J/m2)
0.0560.0995 (m/s)
Optimal Parameter
RMSE
HMLE
39.70
158.30
88.64
42.15
0.0046
0.0073
6.653
4.749
9.15
9.97
0.0009
0.0008
0.6127
0.8622
14.282
10.573
0.0914
0.0954
Compromise
Solution
133.09
57.32
0.0123
8.264
9.43
0.0008
0.7588
16.037
0.0969
(equifinality; Beven and Binley, 1992; Savenije, 2001;
Beven, 2006),
.
,
.
2003 2007
Figs. 8(b) and 8(c) . Pareto
,
,
.
Case II
(Fig. 6(b))
Case I
, Fig. 8(d)
,
. ,
Table 3
,
Fig. 8. Hydrological Uncertainty Ranges Associated with the Pareto Solution Sets: (a)(c) Ensemble
Hydrographs of Case I and (d)(f) Ensemble Sedigraphs of Case II
43 12 2010 12
1021
Case I
.
, 2
Case I
.
, Figs. 9(d)9(f)
, Case II
.
2
,
Fig. 9. Hydrological Uncertainty Ranges Associated with the Pareto Solution Sets: (a)(c) Ensemble
Hydrographs of Case III and (d)(f) Ensemble Sedigraphs of Case III
1022
(Fig. 9(f) ).
,
,
.
4.4
Case II III
.
,
(+) (-)
.
Figs. 1012 ,
Case II III Table
5 .
Case II
-1.42+5.34cm ,
0.055cm
. -2.19
+5.57cm ,
0.11cm . ,
. Fig. 10
,
0.23cm ,
0.96cm .
Case II
Figs. 11 and 12 . Figs.
1012
,
Thiessen
Thiessen .
Case III
-8.24+12.75cm
Case II 4 0.24cm .
-59.11+98.87cm
, 1.65cm
. Case III
Fig. 10. Spatial Uncertainty of Erosion and Deposition During the Rusa Event
43 12 2010 12
1023
Fig. 11. Spatial Uncertainty of Erosion and Deposition During the Maemi Event
Fig. 12. Spatial Uncertainty of Erosion and Deposition During the Nari Event
98.1cm,
50.87cm .
Case III
Figs. 11 and 12 .
Case III
Case II
1024
, Case II
Thiessen
.
(drainage area)
MOSCEM
-- -
-
, --
Pareto
.
Pareto
,
.
.
1) MOSCEM Pareto
, Case I
Pareto
. Case II
Case I
,
Pareto Case I
. Case III
43 12 2010 12
Pareto
Case I II
.
2) Case I
,
,
.
,
. Case II , Case
I
,
. ,
. Case III
Case I II
,
Case I II .
3)
, Case II III
. ,
,
Thiessen
1025
.
,
-
,
.
(08F01)
.
, , , (2002).
- .
, , 35, 5,
pp. 541-552.
, , , (2007).
Tank (II):
. ,
, 40, 9, pp. 687-696.
, , , (2007).
Tank (I):
. ,
, 40, 9, pp. 677-685.
, , , (2004).
SIMHYD TANK
. ,
, 37, 2, pp. 121-131.
(2002).
.
(2003).
.
(2007).
.
Ambroise, B., Perrin, J.L., and Reutenauer, D. (1995).
Multicriterion validation of semi-distributed conceptual model of the water cycle in Fecht catchment
(Vosgesmassif, France). Water Resources Research,
Vol. 31, No. 6, pp. 1467-1481.
Beven, K. (1989). Changing ideas in hydrology-The
1026
43 12 2010 12
1027