4.7 Article

Quantifying dynamic sensitivity of optimization algorithm parameters to improve hydrological model calibration

期刊

JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGY
卷 533, 期 -, 页码 213-223

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.11.052

关键词

Algorithm; Optimization; SCE-UA; Sensitivity; TOPMODEL; Variance decomposition

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51320105010, 51279021]
  2. China Scholarship Council

向作者/读者索取更多资源

It is widely recognized that optimization algorithm parameters have significant impacts on algorithm performance, but quantifying the influence is very complex and difficult due to high computational demands and dynamic nature of search parameters. The overall aim of this paper is to develop a global sensitivity analysis based framework to dynamically quantify the individual and interactive influence of algorithm parameters on algorithm performance. A variance decomposition sensitivity analysis method, Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), is used for sensitivity quantification, because it is capable of handling small samples and more computationally efficient compared with other approaches. The Shuffled Complex Evolution method developed at the University of Arizona algorithm (SCE-UA) is selected as an optimization algorithm for investigation, and two criteria, i.e., convergence speed and success rate, are used to measure the performance of SCE-UA. Results show the proposed framework can effectively reveal the dynamic sensitivity of algorithm parametets in the search processes, including individual influences of parameters and their interactive impacts. Interactions between algorithm parameters have significant impacts on SCE-UA performance, which has not been reported in previous research. The proposed framework provides a means to understand the dynamics of algorithm parameter influence, and highlights the significance of considering interactive parameter influence to improve algorithm performance in the search processes. (C) 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据