4.7 Article

Ensemble hydrological prediction of streamflow percentile at ungauged basins in Pakistan

期刊

JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGY
卷 525, 期 -, 页码 130-137

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.03.042

关键词

Ensemble hydrological prediction; Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency; Performance weights; Ungauged site

资金

  1. Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation (NRF) of Korea [2013R1A1A2013160]
  2. National Research Foundation of Korea [2013R1A1A2013160] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Streamflow records with sufficient spatial and temporal coverage at the site of interest are usually scarce in Pakistan. As an alternative, various regional methods have been frequently adopted to derive hydrological information, which in essence attempt to transfer hydrological information from gauged to ungauged catchments. In this study, a new concept of ensemble hydrological prediction (EHP) was introduced which is an improved regional method for hydrological prediction at ungauged sites. It was mainly based on the performance weights (triple-connection weights (TCW)) derived from Nash Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE) and hydrological variable (here percentiles) calculated from three traditional regional transfer methods (RTMs) with suitable modification (i.e., three-step drainage area ratio (DAR) method, inverse distance weighting (IDW) method, and three-step regional regression analysis (RRA)). The overall results indicated that the proposed EHP method was robust for estimating hydrological percentiles at ungauged sites as compared to traditional individual RTMs. The comparative study based on NSE, percent bias (PBIAS) and the relative error (RE) as performance criteria resulted that the EHP is a constructive alternative for hydrological prediction of ungauged basins. (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