Ideal point error for model assessment in data-driven river flow forecasting

When analysing the performance of hydrological models in river forecasting, researchers use a number of diverse statistics. Although some statistics appear to be used more regularly in such analyses than others, there is a distinct lack of consistency in evaluation, making studies undertaken by diff...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: C. W. Dawson, N. J. Mount, R. J. Abrahart, A. Y. Shamseldin
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Copernicus Publications 2012-08-01
Series:Hydrology and Earth System Sciences
Online Access:http://www.hydrol-earth-syst-sci.net/16/3049/2012/hess-16-3049-2012.pdf
id doaj-0697e276978a4fc38357206635f062b3
record_format Article
spelling doaj-0697e276978a4fc38357206635f062b32020-11-24T23:11:14ZengCopernicus PublicationsHydrology and Earth System Sciences1027-56061607-79382012-08-011683049306010.5194/hess-16-3049-2012Ideal point error for model assessment in data-driven river flow forecastingC. W. DawsonN. J. MountR. J. AbrahartA. Y. ShamseldinWhen analysing the performance of hydrological models in river forecasting, researchers use a number of diverse statistics. Although some statistics appear to be used more regularly in such analyses than others, there is a distinct lack of consistency in evaluation, making studies undertaken by different authors or performed at different locations difficult to compare in a meaningful manner. Moreover, even within individual reported case studies, substantial contradictions are found to occur between one measure of performance and another. In this paper we examine the ideal point error (IPE) metric – a recently introduced measure of model performance that integrates a number of recognised metrics in a logical way. Having a single, integrated measure of performance is appealing as it should permit more straightforward model inter-comparisons. However, this is reliant on a transferrable standardisation of the individual metrics that are combined to form the IPE. This paper examines one potential option for standardisation: the use of naive model benchmarking.http://www.hydrol-earth-syst-sci.net/16/3049/2012/hess-16-3049-2012.pdf
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author C. W. Dawson
N. J. Mount
R. J. Abrahart
A. Y. Shamseldin
spellingShingle C. W. Dawson
N. J. Mount
R. J. Abrahart
A. Y. Shamseldin
Ideal point error for model assessment in data-driven river flow forecasting
Hydrology and Earth System Sciences
author_facet C. W. Dawson
N. J. Mount
R. J. Abrahart
A. Y. Shamseldin
author_sort C. W. Dawson
title Ideal point error for model assessment in data-driven river flow forecasting
title_short Ideal point error for model assessment in data-driven river flow forecasting
title_full Ideal point error for model assessment in data-driven river flow forecasting
title_fullStr Ideal point error for model assessment in data-driven river flow forecasting
title_full_unstemmed Ideal point error for model assessment in data-driven river flow forecasting
title_sort ideal point error for model assessment in data-driven river flow forecasting
publisher Copernicus Publications
series Hydrology and Earth System Sciences
issn 1027-5606
1607-7938
publishDate 2012-08-01
description When analysing the performance of hydrological models in river forecasting, researchers use a number of diverse statistics. Although some statistics appear to be used more regularly in such analyses than others, there is a distinct lack of consistency in evaluation, making studies undertaken by different authors or performed at different locations difficult to compare in a meaningful manner. Moreover, even within individual reported case studies, substantial contradictions are found to occur between one measure of performance and another. In this paper we examine the ideal point error (IPE) metric – a recently introduced measure of model performance that integrates a number of recognised metrics in a logical way. Having a single, integrated measure of performance is appealing as it should permit more straightforward model inter-comparisons. However, this is reliant on a transferrable standardisation of the individual metrics that are combined to form the IPE. This paper examines one potential option for standardisation: the use of naive model benchmarking.
url http://www.hydrol-earth-syst-sci.net/16/3049/2012/hess-16-3049-2012.pdf
work_keys_str_mv AT cwdawson idealpointerrorformodelassessmentindatadrivenriverflowforecasting
AT njmount idealpointerrorformodelassessmentindatadrivenriverflowforecasting
AT rjabrahart idealpointerrorformodelassessmentindatadrivenriverflowforecasting
AT ayshamseldin idealpointerrorformodelassessmentindatadrivenriverflowforecasting
_version_ 1725605211887632384