English
 
Privacy Policy Disclaimer
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT
  Are modern metaheuristics successful in calibrating simple conceptual rainfall–runoff models?

Piotrowski, A. P., Napiorkowski, M. J., Napiorkowski, J. J., Osuch, M., Kundzewicz, Z. W. (2017): Are modern metaheuristics successful in calibrating simple conceptual rainfall–runoff models? - Hydrological Sciences Journal, 62, 4, 606-625.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2016.1234712

Item is

Files

show Files
hide Files
:
22297.pdf (Publisher version), 4MB
Name:
22297.pdf
Description:
-
Visibility:
Public
MIME-Type / Checksum:
application/pdf / [MD5]
Technical Metadata:
Copyright Date:
-
Copyright Info:
-
License:
-

Locators

show

Creators

show
hide
 Creators:
Piotrowski, A. P.1, Author
Napiorkowski, M. J.1, Author
Napiorkowski, J. J.1, Author
Osuch, M.1, Author
Kundzewicz, Zbigniew W.2, Author              
Affiliations:
1External Organizations, ou_persistent22              
2Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, ou_persistent13              

Content

show
hide
Free keywords: -
 Abstract: In recent years sampling approaches have been used more widely than optimization algorithms to find parameters of conceptual rainfall–runoff models, but the difficulty of calibration of such models remains in dispute. The problem of finding a set of optimal parameters for conceptual rainfall–runoff models is interpreted differently in various studies, ranging from simple to relatively complex and difficult. In many papers, it is claimed that novel calibration approaches, so-called metaheuristics, outperform the older ones when applied to this task, but contradictory opinions are also plentiful. The present study aims at calibration of two simple lumped conceptual hydrological models, HBV and GR4J, by means of a large number of metaheuristic algorithms. The tests are performed on four catchments located in regions with relatively similar climatic conditions, but on different continents. The comparison shows that, although parameters found may somehow differ, the performance criteria achieved with simple lumped models calibrated by various metaheuristics are very similar and differences are insignificant from the hydrological point of view. However, occasionally some algorithms find slightly better solutions than those found by the vast majority of methods. This means that the problem of calibration of simple lumped HBV or GR4J models may be deceptive from the optimization perspective, as the vast majority of algorithms that follow a common evolutionary principle of survival of the fittest lead to sub-optimal solutions.

Details

show
hide
Language(s):
 Dates: 2017
 Publication Status: Finally published
 Pages: -
 Publishing info: -
 Table of Contents: -
 Rev. Type: Peer
 Identifiers: DOI: 10.1080/02626667.2016.1234712
PIKDOMAIN: Climate Impacts & Vulnerabilities - Research Domain II
eDoc: 8001
Organisational keyword: RD2 - Climate Resilience
Research topic keyword: Freshwater
Working Group: Hydroclimatic Risks
 Degree: -

Event

show

Legal Case

show

Project information

show

Source 1

show
hide
Title: Hydrological Sciences Journal
Source Genre: Journal, SCI, Scopus, p3
 Creator(s):
Affiliations:
Publ. Info: -
Pages: - Volume / Issue: 62 (4) Sequence Number: - Start / End Page: 606 - 625 Identifier: CoNE: https://publications.pik-potsdam.de/cone/journals/resource/journals206