Assessing the quality of land system models: moving from valibration to evaludation

Calum Brown, J. Millington, M. Rounsevell
{"title":"Assessing the quality of land system models: moving from valibration to evaludation","authors":"Calum Brown, J. Millington, M. Rounsevell","doi":"10.18174/sesmo.18434","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Reviews suggest that evaluation of land system models is largely inadequate, with undue reliance on a vague concept of validation. Efforts to improve and standardise evaluation practices have so far had limited effect. In this article we examine the issues surrounding land system model evaluation and consider the relevance of the TRACE framework for environmental model documentation. In doing so, we discuss the application of a comprehensive range of evaluation procedures to existing models, and the value of each specific procedure. We develop a tiered checklist for going beyond what seems to be a common practice of ‘valibration’ (the repeated variation of model parameter values to achieve agreement with data) to achieving ‘evaludation’ (the rigorous, broad-based assessment of model quality and validity). We propose the Land Use Change – TRACE (LUC-TRACE) model evaludation protocol and argue that engagement with a comprehensive protocol of this kind (even if not this particular one) is valuable in ensuring that land system model results are interpreted appropriately. We also suggest that the main benefit of such formalised structures is to assist the process of critical thinking about model utility, and that the variety of legitimate modelling approaches precludes universal tests of whether a model is ‘valid’. Evaludation is therefore a detailed and subjective process requiring the sustained intellectual engagement of model developers and users.","PeriodicalId":166291,"journal":{"name":"Socio-Environmental Systems Modelling","volume":"36 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Socio-Environmental Systems Modelling","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18174/sesmo.18434","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Reviews suggest that evaluation of land system models is largely inadequate, with undue reliance on a vague concept of validation. Efforts to improve and standardise evaluation practices have so far had limited effect. In this article we examine the issues surrounding land system model evaluation and consider the relevance of the TRACE framework for environmental model documentation. In doing so, we discuss the application of a comprehensive range of evaluation procedures to existing models, and the value of each specific procedure. We develop a tiered checklist for going beyond what seems to be a common practice of ‘valibration’ (the repeated variation of model parameter values to achieve agreement with data) to achieving ‘evaludation’ (the rigorous, broad-based assessment of model quality and validity). We propose the Land Use Change – TRACE (LUC-TRACE) model evaludation protocol and argue that engagement with a comprehensive protocol of this kind (even if not this particular one) is valuable in ensuring that land system model results are interpreted appropriately. We also suggest that the main benefit of such formalised structures is to assist the process of critical thinking about model utility, and that the variety of legitimate modelling approaches precludes universal tests of whether a model is ‘valid’. Evaludation is therefore a detailed and subjective process requiring the sustained intellectual engagement of model developers and users.
评估土地系统模型的质量:从验证到评估
审查表明,对土地系统模型的评价在很大程度上是不充分的,过分依赖一个模糊的验证概念。迄今为止,改进评价做法并使之标准化的努力效果有限。在本文中,我们研究了围绕土地系统模型评估的问题,并考虑了TRACE框架与环境模型文档的相关性。在此过程中,我们讨论了对现有模型的综合评估程序的应用,以及每个特定程序的价值。我们开发了一个分层的检查表,以超越“验证”(模型参数值的重复变化以达到与数据一致)的常见实践,以实现“评估”(对模型质量和有效性的严格,广泛的评估)。我们提出了土地利用变化-追踪(LUC-TRACE)模型评估协议,并认为参与这种全面的协议(即使不是这个特定的协议)对于确保土地系统模型结果得到适当解释是有价值的。我们还建议,这种形式化结构的主要好处是有助于对模型效用进行批判性思考的过程,并且各种合法的建模方法排除了对模型是否“有效”的通用测试。因此,评估是一个详细和主观的过程,需要模型开发人员和用户持续的智力参与。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信