Checking for non-preferred file/folder path names (may take a long time depending on the number of files/folders) ...
This resource contains some files/folders that have non-preferred characters in their name. Show non-conforming files/folders.
This resource contains content types with files that need to be updated to match with metadata changes. Show content type files that need updating.
| Authors: |
|
|
|---|---|---|
| Owners: |
|
This resource does not have an owner who is an active HydroShare user. Contact CUAHSI (help@cuahsi.org) for information on this resource. |
| Type: | Resource | |
| Storage: | The size of this resource is 1.5 KB | |
| Created: | Feb 08, 2023 at 3:56 p.m. | |
| Last updated: | Feb 08, 2023 at 3:57 p.m. | |
| Citation: | See how to cite this resource |
| Sharing Status: | Public |
|---|---|
| Views: | 279 |
| Downloads: | 187 |
| +1 Votes: | Be the first one to this. |
| Comments: | No comments (yet) |
Abstract
We present a general and flexible Bayesian approach using uncertainty multipliers to simultaneously analyze the input and parameter uncertainty of a groundwater flow model with consideration of the heteroscedasticity of the groundwater level error. Groundwater recharge and groundwater abstraction multipliers are introduced to quantify the uncertainty of the spatially distributed input data of the groundwater model in addition to parameter uncertainty. The heteroscedasticity of the groundwater level error is also considered in our Bayesian approach by incorporating a new heteroscedastic error model. The proposed methodology is applied in an overexploited aquifer in Bangladesh where groundwater abstraction and recharge data are highly uncertain. The results of the study confirm that consideration of recharge and abstraction uncertainty through the use of recharge and abstraction multipliers is feasible even in a fully distributed physically based groundwater flow model. Heteroscedasticity is present in the groundwater level error and has an effect on the model predictions and parameter distributions. The input uncertainty affects the model predictions and parameter distributions and it is the dominant source of uncertainty in the groundwater flow prediction. Additionally, the approach described also provides a new way to optimize the spatially distributed recharge and abstraction data along with the parameter values under uncertain input conditions. We conclude that considering model input uncertainty along with parameter uncertainty and heteroscedasticity of the groundwater level error is important for obtaining realistic model predictions and a correct estimation of the uncertainty bounds.
Subject Keywords
Coverage
Spatial
Content
Additional Metadata
| Name | Value |
|---|---|
| DOI | 10.1029/2017WR021857 |
| Depth | |
| Scale | 1 001 - 10 000 km² |
| Layers | 1 |
| Purpose | Scientific investigation (not related to applied problem) |
| GroMoPo_ID | 331 |
| IsVerified | True |
| Model Code | MODFLOW |
| Model Link | https://doi.org/10.1029/2017WR021857 |
| Model Time | 1990-2000 |
| Model Year | 2018 |
| Model Authors | Mustafa, SMT; Nossent, J; Ghysels, G; Huysmans, M |
| Model Country | Bangladesh |
| Data Available | Report/paper only |
| Developer Email | syed.mustafa@vub.be |
| Dominant Geology | Unconsolidated sediments |
| Developer Country | Belgium |
| Publication Title | Estimation and Impact Assessment of Input and Parameter Uncertainty in Predicting Groundwater Flow With a Fully Distributed Model |
| Original Developer | No |
| Additional Information | |
| Integration or Coupling | None of the above |
| Evaluation or Calibration | Dynamic water levels |
| Geologic Data Availability | No |
How to Cite
This resource is shared under the Creative Commons Attribution CC BY.
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Comments
There are currently no comments
New Comment