Illuminating groundwater flow modeling uncertainty through spatial discretization and complexity exploration

IF 2.3 4区 地球科学
Saeideh Samani
{"title":"Illuminating groundwater flow modeling uncertainty through spatial discretization and complexity exploration","authors":"Saeideh Samani","doi":"10.1007/s11600-024-01346-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Uncertainty in groundwater modeling presents a significant challenge, originating from various sources. This groundbreaking study aims to quantitatively assess uncertainties arising from spatial discretization and complexity dynamics. The research focuses on the Najafabad Aquifer in Esfahan, Iran, as a compelling case study. Five distinct conceptual models were developed, with parameter counts of 16 (model 1), 20 (model 2), 22 (model 3), and 26 (model 4 and 5), and subjected to a consistent spatial discretization of 500 m. Additionally, two alternative models with spatial discretizations of 250 m (model 1a) and 1000 m (model 1 b) were introduced based on the least complex model with 16 parameters. The study comprehensively examines groundwater uncertainty by manipulating spatial discretization while considering complexity dynamics. Model Muse facilitates simulation, and UCODE is utilized for calibration using observed hydraulic head data. Uncertainties are explored using Bayesian model-averaging (BMA) and model selection criteria. Comparing probabilities of the initial five models reveals increasing uncertainty with a greater number of parameters (KIC in model 1: 99.25%, model 2: 0.41%, model 3: 0.34%, model 4 and 5: 0%). Investigation of seven alternative models highlights the dominant influence of coarser spatial discretization on groundwater modeling uncertainty. Remarkably, despite the lowest complexity in model 1 with probability of 99.25%, the model with coarse spatial discretization (model 1b) exhibits the zero probability (KIC in model 1a: 93.42%, model 1: 6.53%, model 1b: 0%, model 2: 0.03%, model 3: 0.02%, model 4 and 5: 0%.). Thus, considering optimal parameter count and spatial discretization size is crucial in conceptual model development. This study pushes the boundaries of understanding the intricate relationship between spatial discretization, complexity, and groundwater modeling uncertainty. Findings hold significant implications for improving model accuracy and decision-making in hydrogeological studies.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":6988,"journal":{"name":"Acta Geophysica","volume":"73 1","pages":"603 - 617"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Geophysica","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11600-024-01346-y","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Uncertainty in groundwater modeling presents a significant challenge, originating from various sources. This groundbreaking study aims to quantitatively assess uncertainties arising from spatial discretization and complexity dynamics. The research focuses on the Najafabad Aquifer in Esfahan, Iran, as a compelling case study. Five distinct conceptual models were developed, with parameter counts of 16 (model 1), 20 (model 2), 22 (model 3), and 26 (model 4 and 5), and subjected to a consistent spatial discretization of 500 m. Additionally, two alternative models with spatial discretizations of 250 m (model 1a) and 1000 m (model 1 b) were introduced based on the least complex model with 16 parameters. The study comprehensively examines groundwater uncertainty by manipulating spatial discretization while considering complexity dynamics. Model Muse facilitates simulation, and UCODE is utilized for calibration using observed hydraulic head data. Uncertainties are explored using Bayesian model-averaging (BMA) and model selection criteria. Comparing probabilities of the initial five models reveals increasing uncertainty with a greater number of parameters (KIC in model 1: 99.25%, model 2: 0.41%, model 3: 0.34%, model 4 and 5: 0%). Investigation of seven alternative models highlights the dominant influence of coarser spatial discretization on groundwater modeling uncertainty. Remarkably, despite the lowest complexity in model 1 with probability of 99.25%, the model with coarse spatial discretization (model 1b) exhibits the zero probability (KIC in model 1a: 93.42%, model 1: 6.53%, model 1b: 0%, model 2: 0.03%, model 3: 0.02%, model 4 and 5: 0%.). Thus, considering optimal parameter count and spatial discretization size is crucial in conceptual model development. This study pushes the boundaries of understanding the intricate relationship between spatial discretization, complexity, and groundwater modeling uncertainty. Findings hold significant implications for improving model accuracy and decision-making in hydrogeological studies.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

通过空间离散化和复杂性探索揭示地下水流建模的不确定性
地下水模拟的不确定性带来了巨大的挑战,其来源多种多样。这项开创性的研究旨在定量评估由空间离散化和复杂性动力学引起的不确定性。该研究的重点是伊朗伊斯法罕的纳贾法巴德含水层,这是一个令人信服的案例研究。开发了5个不同的概念模型,参数数分别为16(模型1)、20(模型2)、22(模型3)和26(模型4和5),并进行了500 m的一致空间离散化。此外,在包含16个参数的最小复杂模型的基础上,引入了空间离散化为250 m(模型1a)和1000 m(模型1b)的两个备选模型。该研究在考虑复杂性动力学的同时,通过空间离散化来全面考察地下水的不确定性。Muse模型有助于模拟,UCODE用于根据观察到的水头数据进行校准。利用贝叶斯模型平均(BMA)和模型选择准则探讨了不确定性。比较初始5个模型的概率,发现不确定性随着参数数量的增加而增加(模型1的KIC为99.25%,模型2为0.41%,模型3为0.34%,模型4和模型5为0%)。对7种可选模型的研究表明,较粗的空间离散化对地下水模拟不确定性的主要影响。值得注意的是,尽管模型1的复杂性最低,概率为99.25%,但具有粗糙空间离散化的模型(模型1b)呈现出零概率(模型1a的KIC为93.42%,模型1为6.53%,模型1b为0%,模型2为0.03%,模型3为0.02%,模型4和模型5为0%)。因此,考虑最优参数数量和空间离散大小在概念模型开发中至关重要。这项研究推动了对空间离散化、复杂性和地下水模拟不确定性之间复杂关系的理解。研究结果对提高水文地质研究中的模型精度和决策具有重要意义。
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
Acta Geophysica
Acta Geophysica GEOCHEMISTRY & GEOPHYSICS-
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
13.00%
发文量
251
期刊介绍: Acta Geophysica is open to all kinds of manuscripts including research and review articles, short communications, comments to published papers, letters to the Editor as well as book reviews. Some of the issues are fully devoted to particular topics; we do encourage proposals for such topical issues. We accept submissions from scientists world-wide, offering high scientific and editorial standard and comprehensive treatment of the discussed topics.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信