关于大陆尺度水文模型预测监管应用中日溪流百分位数能力的案例研究

IF 2.6 4区 环境科学与生态学 Q3 ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL
Joseph L. Gutenson, Kent H. Sparrow, Stephen W. Brown, Mark D. Wahl, Kyle B. Gordon
{"title":"关于大陆尺度水文模型预测监管应用中日溪流百分位数能力的案例研究","authors":"Joseph L. Gutenson,&nbsp;Kent H. Sparrow,&nbsp;Stephen W. Brown,&nbsp;Mark D. Wahl,&nbsp;Kyle B. Gordon","doi":"10.1111/1752-1688.13189","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Regulatory practitioners use hydroclimatic data to provide context to observations typically collected through field site visits and aerial imagery analysis. In the absence of site-specific data, regulatory practitioners must use proxy hydroclimatic data and models to assess a stream's hydroclimatology. One intent of current-generation continental-scale hydrologic models is to provide such hydrologic context to ungaged watersheds. In this study, the ability of two state-of-the-art, operational, continental-scale hydrologic modeling frameworks, the National Water Model and the Group on Earth Observation Global Water Sustainability (GEOGloWS) European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) Streamflow Model, to produce daily streamflow percentiles and categorical estimates of the streamflow normalcy was examined. The modeled streamflow percentiles were compared to observed daily streamflow percentiles at four United States Geological Survey stream gages. The model's performance was then compared to a baseline assessment methodology, the Antecedent Precipitation Tool. Results indicated that, when compared to baseline assessment techniques, the accuracy of the National Water Model (NWM) or GEOGloWS ECMWF Streamflow Model was greater than the accuracy of the baseline assessment methodology at four stream gage locations. The NWM performed best at three of the four gages. This work highlighted a novel application of current-generation continental-scale hydrologic models.</p>","PeriodicalId":17234,"journal":{"name":"Journal of The American Water Resources Association","volume":"60 2","pages":"461-479"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Case study of continental-scale hydrologic modeling's ability to predict daily streamflow percentiles for regulatory application\",\"authors\":\"Joseph L. Gutenson,&nbsp;Kent H. Sparrow,&nbsp;Stephen W. Brown,&nbsp;Mark D. Wahl,&nbsp;Kyle B. Gordon\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/1752-1688.13189\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Regulatory practitioners use hydroclimatic data to provide context to observations typically collected through field site visits and aerial imagery analysis. In the absence of site-specific data, regulatory practitioners must use proxy hydroclimatic data and models to assess a stream's hydroclimatology. One intent of current-generation continental-scale hydrologic models is to provide such hydrologic context to ungaged watersheds. In this study, the ability of two state-of-the-art, operational, continental-scale hydrologic modeling frameworks, the National Water Model and the Group on Earth Observation Global Water Sustainability (GEOGloWS) European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) Streamflow Model, to produce daily streamflow percentiles and categorical estimates of the streamflow normalcy was examined. The modeled streamflow percentiles were compared to observed daily streamflow percentiles at four United States Geological Survey stream gages. The model's performance was then compared to a baseline assessment methodology, the Antecedent Precipitation Tool. Results indicated that, when compared to baseline assessment techniques, the accuracy of the National Water Model (NWM) or GEOGloWS ECMWF Streamflow Model was greater than the accuracy of the baseline assessment methodology at four stream gage locations. The NWM performed best at three of the four gages. This work highlighted a novel application of current-generation continental-scale hydrologic models.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17234,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of The American Water Resources Association\",\"volume\":\"60 2\",\"pages\":\"461-479\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of The American Water Resources Association\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1752-1688.13189\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of The American Water Resources Association","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1752-1688.13189","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

监管从业人员使用水文气候数据为通常通过实地考察和航空图像分析收集的观测结果提供背景信息。在缺乏特定地点数据的情况下,监管从业人员必须使用代用水文气候数据和模型来评估溪流的水文气候。新一代大陆尺度水文模型的目的之一就是为无测站流域提供这种水文背景。在这项研究中,我们考察了两个最先进的、可操作的大陆尺度水文模型框架,即国家水模型和对地观测全球水可持续性小组(GEOGloWS)欧洲中期天气预报中心(ECMWF)的流模型,它们生成日流水百分位数和流水正常值分类估计值的能力。研究人员将模拟的溪流百分位数与美国地质调查局四个溪流测站观测到的日溪流百分位数进行了比较。然后将模型的性能与基线评估方法--前兆降水工具--进行了比较。结果表明,与基线评估技术相比,国家水模型(NWM)或 GEOGloWS ECMWF 气流模型在四个测流点的准确性高于基线评估方法。国家水模型在四个水文站中的三个表现最佳。这项工作凸显了新一代大陆尺度水文模型的新颖应用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Case study of continental-scale hydrologic modeling's ability to predict daily streamflow percentiles for regulatory application

Regulatory practitioners use hydroclimatic data to provide context to observations typically collected through field site visits and aerial imagery analysis. In the absence of site-specific data, regulatory practitioners must use proxy hydroclimatic data and models to assess a stream's hydroclimatology. One intent of current-generation continental-scale hydrologic models is to provide such hydrologic context to ungaged watersheds. In this study, the ability of two state-of-the-art, operational, continental-scale hydrologic modeling frameworks, the National Water Model and the Group on Earth Observation Global Water Sustainability (GEOGloWS) European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) Streamflow Model, to produce daily streamflow percentiles and categorical estimates of the streamflow normalcy was examined. The modeled streamflow percentiles were compared to observed daily streamflow percentiles at four United States Geological Survey stream gages. The model's performance was then compared to a baseline assessment methodology, the Antecedent Precipitation Tool. Results indicated that, when compared to baseline assessment techniques, the accuracy of the National Water Model (NWM) or GEOGloWS ECMWF Streamflow Model was greater than the accuracy of the baseline assessment methodology at four stream gage locations. The NWM performed best at three of the four gages. This work highlighted a novel application of current-generation continental-scale hydrologic models.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of The American Water Resources Association
Journal of The American Water Resources Association 环境科学-地球科学综合
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
12.50%
发文量
100
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: JAWRA seeks to be the preeminent scholarly publication on multidisciplinary water resources issues. JAWRA papers present ideas derived from multiple disciplines woven together to give insight into a critical water issue, or are based primarily upon a single discipline with important applications to other disciplines. Papers often cover the topics of recent AWRA conferences such as riparian ecology, geographic information systems, adaptive management, and water policy. JAWRA authors present work within their disciplinary fields to a broader audience. Our Associate Editors and reviewers reflect this diversity to ensure a knowledgeable and fair review of a broad range of topics. We particularly encourage submissions of papers which impart a ''take home message'' our readers can use.
×
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