Exploring Signature‐Based Model Calibration for Streamflow Prediction in Ungauged Basins
Abstract Calibration of precipitation‐streamflow models to streamflow signatures is a promising approach for streamflow prediction in ungauged basins (PUB). The estimation of parameter and prediction uncertainty in this case is not trivial because: (a) calibration takes place in the signature domain...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2023-07-01
|
| Series: | Water Resources Research |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1029/2022WR031929 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Abstract Calibration of precipitation‐streamflow models to streamflow signatures is a promising approach for streamflow prediction in ungauged basins (PUB). The estimation of parameter and prediction uncertainty in this case is not trivial because: (a) calibration takes place in the signature domain, while predictions are required in the time domain, and (b) streamflow signatures are estimated (e.g., from donor catchments) rather than “observed” (computed from observed streamflow in the target catchment), and therefore particularly uncertain. This study investigates model calibration using estimated signatures in an Approximate Bayesian Computation framework. First, we construct a stochastic signature transfer model, based on seasonal flow duration curves. Second, we calibrate a precipitation‐streamflow model to the estimated signatures, accounting for their uncertainty. The proposed method is tested in six catchments of the Thur basin, Switzerland. Three data availability scenarios are considered: (a) concomitant scenario, where signatures are “observed,” (b) non‐concomitant scenario, where signatures are transferred from a different time period, and (c) regionalization scenario, where signatures are transferred from (neighboring) donor catchments. In this study, the switch from observed to regionalized signatures increases predictive streamflow uncertainty by 38% and worsens the (deterministic) fit to observations by 17% (in terms of Nash‐Sutcliffe efficiency). Despite this deterioration, posterior predictive uncertainty remains lower than prior predictive uncertainty generated using uniform priors over representative parameter ranges (“uncalibrated” model), which demonstrates the effectiveness of the proposed signature‐based calibration. More importantly, uncertainty is reliably estimated at the ungauged catchments, which represents a key advance in stochastic streamflow PUB. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 0043-1397 1944-7973 |