Evaluation of Maximum Likelihood Parameter estimation techniques for conceptual rainfall‐runoff models: Influence of calibration data variability and length on model credibility

Evaluation of Maximum Likelihood Parameter estimation techniques for conceptual rainfall‐runoff... The success of an automatic calibration procedure is highly dependent on the choice of the objective function and the nature (quantity and quality) of the data used. The objective function should be selected on the basis of the stochastic properties of the errors present in the data and in the model. Also, the data should be chosen so as to contain as much valuable information about the process as possible. In this paper we compare the performance of two maximum likelihood estimators, the AMLE, which assumes the presence of first lag autocorrelated homogeneous variance errors, and the HMLE, which assumes the presence of uncorrelated inhomogeneous variance errors, to the commonly used simple least squares criterion, SLS. The model calibrated was the soil moisture accounting model of the U.S. National Weather Service's river forecast system (SMA‐NWSRFS). The results indicate that a properly chosen objective function can enhance the possibility of obtaining unique and conceptually realistic parameter estimates. Furthermore, the sensitivity of the estimation results to various characteristics of the calibration data, such as hydrologic variability and length, are substantially reduced. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Water Resources Research Wiley

Evaluation of Maximum Likelihood Parameter estimation techniques for conceptual rainfall‐runoff models: Influence of calibration data variability and length on model credibility

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wiley/evaluation-of-maximum-likelihood-parameter-estimation-techniques-for-f0eFn9A0Zi
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

The success of an automatic calibration procedure is highly dependent on the choice of the objective function and the nature (quantity and quality) of the data used. The objective function should be selected on the basis of the stochastic properties of the errors present in the data and in the model. Also, the data should be chosen so as to contain as much valuable information about the process as possible. In this paper we compare the performance of two maximum likelihood estimators, the AMLE, which assumes the presence of first lag autocorrelated homogeneous variance errors, and the HMLE, which assumes the presence of uncorrelated inhomogeneous variance errors, to the commonly used simple least squares criterion, SLS. The model calibrated was the soil moisture accounting model of the U.S. National Weather Service's river forecast system (SMA‐NWSRFS). The results indicate that a properly chosen objective function can enhance the possibility of obtaining unique and conceptually realistic parameter estimates. Furthermore, the sensitivity of the estimation results to various characteristics of the calibration data, such as hydrologic variability and length, are substantially reduced.

Journal

Water Resources ResearchWiley

Published: Feb 1, 1983

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create folders to
organize your research

Export folders, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off