Using Mutual Information for Global Sensitivity Analysis on Watershed Modeling

Global sensitivity analysis (GSA) often is applied to assess the sensitivity of model outputs to their inputs using ensemble simulations. However, increasing model complexity and the associated computational cost have limited the use of most GSA approaches for process‐based watershed models. We prop...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Water resources research 2022-10, Vol.58 (10), p.n/a
Main Authors: Jiang, Peishi, Son, Kyongho, Mudunuru, Maruti K., Chen, Xingyuan
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Computational efficiency
Computer applications
Courthouses
global sensitivity analysis
Hydrologic models
Mathematical models
Methods
Modelling
mutual information
Parameter sensitivity
Parameters
River discharge
Rivers
Sensitivity analysis
Sobol sensitivity analysis
Soil water
SWAT
Watersheds
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Global sensitivity analysis (GSA) often is applied to assess the sensitivity of model outputs to their inputs using ensemble simulations. However, increasing model complexity and the associated computational cost have limited the use of most GSA approaches for process‐based watershed models. We propose to use mutual information (MI) as a computationally efficient GSA method for watershed modeling. Such MI computed from several hundred realizations usually can capture nonlinear relationships between inputs and outputs of interest. We perform MI‐based watershed sensitivity analyses in studies of the Portage River Watershed in Ohio and the American River Watershed in Washington. In these studies, MI is used to evaluate the sensitivity of river discharges simulated by the Soil and Water Assessment Tool to no less than 20 SWAT parameters for each watershed. Our MI‐based sensitivity analyses achieved convergence with about 300–500 realizations, a small fraction of the ensemble size (i.e., several thousands) required by the Sobol method. Nevertheless, the two‐dimensional MI yields similar sensitivity ranking compared to Sobol's total‐order sensitivity indices, especially for sensitive parameters. Our study thus sheds new light on the use of MI as an affordable GSA method for computationally intensive models such as the hyperresolution, watershed hydrobiogeochemical models. Key Points Mutual information uses fewer model runs to provide consistent sensitivity rankings on Soil and Water Assessment Tool parameters as Sobol sensitivity analysis Statistical significance test accelerates convergence of mutual information calculations We identify the dominant sensitivities on subsurface and snow parameters in agriculture and snow‐dominated watersheds, respectively
ISSN:0043-1397
1944-7973
DOI:10.1029/2022WR032932