Snow hydrology signatures for model identification within a limits‐of‐acceptability approach |
| |
| Authors: | Bettina Schaefli |
| |
| Affiliation: | Laboratory of Ecohydrology and Laboratory of Hydraulic Constructions, School of Architecture, Civil and Environmental Engineering (ENAC), Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland |
| |
| Abstract: | Discharge simulation from snow‐dominated catchments seems to be an easy task. Any spatially explicit precipitation–runoff model coupled to a temperature‐index snow model generally yields simulations that mimic well the observed daily discharges. The robustness of such models is, however, questionable: in the presence of strong annual discharge cycles, small model residuals do not guarantee high explanatory power of the underlying model. This paper proposes a methodology for snow hydrological model identification within a limits‐of‐acceptability framework, where acceptable model simulations are the ones that reproduce a set of signatures within an a priori specified range. The signatures proposed here namely include the relationship between the air temperature regime and the discharge regime, a new snow hydrology signature that can be readily transferred to other Alpine settings. The discriminatory power of all analysed signatures is assessed with a new measure of their discriminatory power in the model prediction domain. The value of the proposed snow hydrology signatures and of the limits‐of‐acceptability approach is demonstrated for the Dischma river in Switzerland, whose discharge shows a strong temporal variability of hydrologic forcing conditions over the last 30 years. The signature‐based model identification for this case study leads to the surprising conclusion that the observed discharge data contains a multi‐year period that cannot be reproduced with the model at hand. This model‐data mismatch might well result from a yet to be identified problem with the discharge observations, which would have been difficult to detect in a classical residual‐based model identification approach. Overall, the detailed results for this case study underline the robustness of the limits‐of‐acceptability approach in the presence of error‐prone observations if it is applied in combination with relatively robust signatures. Future work will show whether snow hydrology signatures and their limits‐of‐acceptability can be regionalized to ungauged catchments, which would make this model selection approach particularly powerful for Alpine environments. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. |
| |
| Keywords: | rainfall– runoff model snow hydrology model calibration limits‐of‐acceptability Monte Carlo simulation signature |
|
|
