Scalable deep learning for watershed model calibration
Maruti K. Mudunuru,Kyongho Son,Peishi Jiang,Glenn Hammond,Xingyuan Chen
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/feart.2022.1026479
IF: 2.9
2022-11-25
Frontiers in Earth Science
Abstract: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.
geosciences, multidisciplinary