Scalable deep learning for watershed model calibration

被引:3
|
作者
Mudunuru, Maruti K. K. [1 ]
Son, Kyongho [1 ]
Jiang, Peishi [1 ]
Hammond, Glenn [1 ]
Chen, Xingyuan [1 ]
机构
[1] Pacific Northwest Natl Lab, Richland, WA 99354 USA
关键词
SWAT calibration; watershed modeling; parameter estimation; inverse problems; convolutional neural networks; scalable deep learning; DATA ASSIMILATION; NEURAL-NETWORKS; DATA-SETS; UNCERTAINTY; ENSEMBLE; OPTIMIZATION; PREDICTION; GUIDELINES; ACCURACY; NHDPLUS;
D O I
10.3389/feart.2022.1026479
中图分类号
P [天文学、地球科学];
学科分类号
07 ;
摘要
Watershed models such as the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) consist of high-dimensional physical and empirical parameters. These parameters often need to be estimated/calibrated through inverse modeling to produce reliable predictions on hydrological fluxes and states. Existing parameter estimation methods can be time consuming, inefficient, and computationally expensive for high-dimensional problems. In this paper, we present an accurate and robust method to calibrate the SWAT model (i.e., 20 parameters) using scalable deep learning (DL). We developed inverse models based on convolutional neural networks (CNN) to assimilate observed streamflow data and estimate the SWAT model parameters. Scalable hyperparameter tuning is performed using high-performance computing resources to identify the top 50 optimal neural network architectures. We used ensemble SWAT simulations to train, validate, and test the CNN models. We estimated the parameters of the SWAT model using observed streamflow data and assessed the impact of measurement errors on SWAT model calibration. We tested and validated the proposed scalable DL methodology on the American River Watershed, located in the Pacific Northwest-based Yakima River basin. Our results show that the CNN-based calibration is better than two popular parameter estimation methods (i.e., the generalized likelihood uncertainty estimation [GLUE] and the dynamically dimensioned search [DDS], which is a global optimization algorithm). For the set of parameters that are sensitive to the observations, our proposed method yields narrower ranges than the GLUE method but broader ranges than values produced using the DDS method within the sampling range even under high relative observational errors. The SWAT model calibration performance using the CNNs, GLUE, and DDS methods are compared using R (2) and a set of efficiency metrics, including Nash-Sutcliffe, logarithmic Nash-Sutcliffe, Kling-Gupta, modified Kling-Gupta, and non-parametric Kling-Gupta scores, computed on the observed and simulated watershed responses. The best CNN-based calibrated set has scores of 0.71, 0.75, 0.85, 0.85, 0.86, and 0.91. The best DDS-based calibrated set has scores of 0.62, 0.69, 0.8, 0.77, 0.79, and 0.82. The best GLUE-based calibrated set has scores of 0.56, 0.58, 0.71, 0.7, 0.71, and 0.8. The scores above show that the CNN-based calibration leads to more accurate low and high streamflow predictions than the GLUE and DDS sets. Our research demonstrates that the proposed method has high potential to improve our current practice in calibrating large-scale integrated hydrologic models.
引用
收藏
页数:23
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Knowledge-informed deep learning for hydrological model calibration: an application to Coal Creek Watershed in Colorado
    Jiang, Peishi
    Shuai, Pin
    Sun, Alexander
    Mudunuru, Maruti K.
    Chen, Xingyuan
    [J]. HYDROLOGY AND EARTH SYSTEM SCIENCES, 2023, 27 (14) : 2621 - 2644
  • [2] Deep Learning Enabled Scalable Calibration of a Dynamically Deformed Multimode Fiber
    Fan, Pengfei
    Wang, Yufei
    Ruddlesden, Michael
    Wang, Xuechun
    Thaha, Mohamed A.
    Sun, Jiasong
    Zuo, Chao
    Su, Lei
    [J]. ADVANCED PHOTONICS RESEARCH, 2022, 3 (10):
  • [3] Regional calibration of a watershed model
    Fernandez, W
    Vogel, RM
    Sankarasubramanian, A
    [J]. HYDROLOGICAL SCIENCES JOURNAL-JOURNAL DES SCIENCES HYDROLOGIQUES, 2000, 45 (05): : 689 - 707
  • [4] Scalable Marginal Likelihood Estimation for Model Selection in Deep Learning
    Immer, Alexander
    Bauer, Matthias
    Fortuin, Vincent
    Ratsch, Gunnar
    Khan, Mohammad Emtiyaz
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON MACHINE LEARNING, VOL 139, 2021, 139
  • [5] Validation of a watershed model without calibration
    Vogel, RM
    Sankarasubramanian, A
    [J]. WATER RESOURCES RESEARCH, 2003, 39 (10)
  • [6] A critical approach to the calibration of a watershed model
    Jacomino, VMF
    Fields, DE
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN WATER RESOURCES ASSOCIATION, 1997, 33 (01): : 143 - 154
  • [7] Developing a deep learning model for the simulation of micro-pollutants in a watershed
    Yun, Daeun
    Abbas, Ather
    Jeon, Junho
    Ligaray, Mayzonee
    Baek, Sang-Soo
    Cho, Kyung Hwa
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2021, 300
  • [8] Investigating deep learning model calibration for classification problems in mechanics
    Mohammadzadeh, Saeed
    Prachaseree, Peerasait
    Lejeune, Emma
    [J]. MECHANICS OF MATERIALS, 2023, 184
  • [9] Real-time model calibration with deep reinforcement learning
    Tian, Yuan
    Chao, Manuel Arias
    Kulkarni, Chetan
    Goebel, Kai
    Fink, Olga
    [J]. MECHANICAL SYSTEMS AND SIGNAL PROCESSING, 2022, 165
  • [10] MATERIAL MODEL CALIBRATION BY DEEP LEARNING FOR ADDITIVELY MANUFACTURED ALLOYS
    Wang, Zihan
    Xu, Hongyi
    Li, Yang
    [J]. PROCEEDINGS OF THE 2020 INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON FLEXIBLE AUTOMATION (ISFA2020), 2020,