USGS Science⌕ Search

Geology topics

G. Leavesley

Publications and source records attributed to G. Leavesley.

4 recordsLinked to original sources
USGS2009

Assessing the impact of land use change on hydrology by ensemble modeling (LUCHEM). I: Model intercomparison with current land use

This paper introduces the project on 'Assessing the impact of land use change on hydrology by ensemble modeling (LUCHEM)' that aims at investigating the envelope of predictions on changes in hydrological fluxes due to land use change. As part of a series of four papers, this paper outlines the motivation and setup of LUCHEM, and presents a model intercomparison for the present-day simulation results. Such an intercomparison provides a valuable basis to investigate the effects of different model structures on model predictions and paves the ground for the analysis of the performance of multi-model ensembles and the reliability of the scenario predictions in companion papers. In this study, we applied a set of 10 lumped, semi-lumped and fully distributed hydrological models that have been previously used in land use change studies to the low mountainous Dill catchment, Germany. Substantial differences in model performance were observed with Nash-Sutcliffe efficiencies ranging from 0.53 to 0.92. Differences in model performance were attributed to (1) model input data, (2) model calibration and (3) the physical basis of the models. The models were applied with two sets of input data: an original and a homogenized data set. This homogenization of precipitation, temperature and leaf area index was performed to reduce the variation between the models. Homogenization improved the comparability of model simulations and resulted in a reduced average bias, although some variation in model data input remained. The effect of the physical differences between models on the long-term water balance was mainly attributed to differences in how models represent evapotranspiration. Semi-lumped and lumped conceptual models slightly outperformed the fully distributed and physically based models. This was attributed to the automatic model calibration typically used for this type of models. Overall, however, we conclude that there was no superior model if several measures of model performance are considered and that all models are suitable to participate in further multi-model ensemble set-ups and land use change scenario investigations. ?? 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Advances in Water Resources↗
USGS2006

Model Parameter Estimation Experiment (MOPEX): An overview of science strategy and major results from the second and third workshops

The Model Parameter Estimation Experiment (MOPEX) is an international project aimed at developing enhanced techniques for the a priori estimation of parameters in hydrologic models and in land surface parameterization schemes of atmospheric models. The MOPEX science strategy involves three major steps: data preparation, a priori parameter estimation methodology development, and demonstration of parameter transferability. A comprehensive MOPEX database has been developed that contains historical hydrometeorological data and land surface characteristics data for many hydrologic basins in the United States (US) and in other countries. This database is being continuously expanded to include more basins in all parts of the world. A number of international MOPEX workshops have been convened to bring together interested hydrologists and land surface modelers from all over world to exchange knowledge and experience in developing a priori parameter estimation techniques. This paper describes the results from the second and third MOPEX workshops. The specific objective of these workshops is to examine the state of a priori parameter estimation techniques and how they can be potentially improved with observations from well-monitored hydrologic basins. Participants of the second and third MOPEX workshops were provided with data from 12 basins in the southeastern US and were asked to carry out a series of numerical experiments using a priori parameters as well as calibrated parameters developed for their respective hydrologic models. Different modeling groups carried out all the required experiments independently using eight different models, and the results from these models have been assembled for analysis in this paper. This paper presents an overview of the MOPEX experiment and its design. The main experimental results are analyzed. A key finding is that existing a priori parameter estimation procedures are problematic and need improvement. Significant improvement of these procedures may be achieved through model calibration of well-monitored hydrologic basins. This paper concludes with a discussion of the lessons learned, and points out further work and future strategy. ?? 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Conference Paper↗
USGS2006

The Model Parameter Estimation Experiment (MOPEX): Its structure, connection to other international initiatives and future directions

The Model Parameter Estimation Experiment (MOPEX) is an international project aimed at developing enhanced techniques for the a priori estimation of parameters in hydrological models and in land surface parameterization schemes connected to atmospheric models. The MOPEX science strategy involves: database creation, a priori parameter estimation methodology development, parameter refinement or calibration, and the demonstration of parameter transferability. A comprehensive MOPEX database has been developed that contains historical hydrometeorological data and land surface characteristics data for many hydrological basins in the United States (US) and in other countries. This database is being continuously expanded to include basins from various hydroclimatic regimes throughout the world. MOPEX research has largely been driven by a series of international workshops that have brought interested hydrologists and land surface modellers together to exchange knowledge and experience in developing and applying parameter estimation techniques. With its focus on parameter estimation, MOPEX plays an important role in the international context of other initiatives such as GEWEX, HEPEX, PUB and PILPS. This paper outlines the MOPEX initiative, discusses its role in the scientific community, and briefly states future directions.

IAHS-AISH Publication↗
USGS1996

Testing and validating environmental models

Generally accepted standards for testing and validating ecosystem models would benefit both modellers and model users. Universally applicable test procedures are difficult to prescribe, given the diversity of modelling approaches and the many uses for models. However, the generally accepted scientific principles of documentation and disclosure provide a useful framework for devising general standards for model evaluation. Adequately documenting model tests requires explicit performance criteria, and explicit benchmarks against which model performance is compared. A model's validity, reliability, and accuracy can be most meaningfully judged by explicit comparison against the available alternatives. In contrast, current practice is often characterized by vague, subjective claims that model predictions show 'acceptable' agreement with data; such claims provide little basis for choosing among alternative models. Strict model tests (those that invalid models are unlikely to pass) are the only ones capable of convincing rational skeptics that a model is probably valid. However, 'false positive' rates as low as 10% can substantially erode the power of validation tests, making them insufficiently strict to convince rational skeptics. Validation tests are often undermined by excessive parameter calibration and overuse of ad hoc model features. Tests are often also divorced from the conditions under which a model will be used, particularly when it is designed to forecast beyond the range of historical experience. In such situations, data from laboratory and field manipulation experiments can provide particularly effective tests, because one can create experimental conditions quite different from historical data, and because experimental data can provide a more precisely defined 'target' for the model to hit. We present a simple demonstration showing that the two most common methods for comparing model predictions to environmental time series (plotting model time series against data time series, and plotting predicted versus observed values) have little diagnostic power. We propose that it may be more useful to statistically extract the relationships of primary interest from the time series, and test the model directly against them.

Science of the Total Environment↗