How effective and efficient are multiobjective evolutionary algorithms at hydrologic model calibration?

This study provides a comprehensive assessment of state-of-the-art evolutionary multiobjective optimization (EMO) tools' relative effectiveness in calibrating hydrologic models. The relative computational efficiency, accuracy, and ease-of-use of the following EMO algorithms are tested: Epsilon...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Y. Tang, P. Reed, T. Wagener
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Copernicus Publications 2006-01-01
Series:Hydrology and Earth System Sciences
Online Access:http://www.hydrol-earth-syst-sci.net/10/289/2006/hess-10-289-2006.pdf
id doaj-6d7e75667c8b4307963732c7ce5643ff
record_format Article
spelling doaj-6d7e75667c8b4307963732c7ce5643ff2020-11-24T23:18:53ZengCopernicus PublicationsHydrology and Earth System Sciences1027-56061607-79382006-01-01102289307How effective and efficient are multiobjective evolutionary algorithms at hydrologic model calibration?Y. TangP. ReedT. WagenerThis study provides a comprehensive assessment of state-of-the-art evolutionary multiobjective optimization (EMO) tools' relative effectiveness in calibrating hydrologic models. The relative computational efficiency, accuracy, and ease-of-use of the following EMO algorithms are tested: Epsilon Dominance Nondominated Sorted Genetic Algorithm-II (ε-NSGAII), the Multiobjective Shuffled Complex Evolution Metropolis algorithm (MOSCEM-UA), and the Strength Pareto Evolutionary Algorithm 2 (SPEA2). This study uses three test cases to compare the algorithms' performances: (1) a standardized test function suite from the computer science literature, (2) a benchmark hydrologic calibration test case for the Leaf River near Collins, Mississippi, and (3) a computationally intensive integrated surface-subsurface model application in the Shale Hills watershed in Pennsylvania. One challenge and contribution of this work is the development of a methodology for comprehensively comparing EMO algorithms that have different search operators and randomization techniques. Overall, SPEA2 attained competitive to superior results for most of the problems tested in this study. The primary strengths of the SPEA2 algorithm lie in its search reliability and its diversity preservation operator. The biggest challenge in maximizing the performance of SPEA2 lies in specifying an effective archive size without a priori knowledge of the Pareto set. In practice, this would require significant trial-and-error analysis, which is problematic for more complex, computationally intensive calibration applications. ε-NSGAII appears to be superior to MOSCEM-UA and competitive with SPEA2 for hydrologic model calibration. ε-NSGAII's primary strength lies in its ease-of-use due to its dynamic population sizing and archiving which lead to rapid convergence to very high quality solutions with minimal user input. MOSCEM-UA is best suited for hydrologic model calibration applications that have small parameter sets and small model evaluation times. In general, it would be expected that MOSCEM-UA's performance would be met or exceeded by either SPEA2 or ε-NSGAII.http://www.hydrol-earth-syst-sci.net/10/289/2006/hess-10-289-2006.pdf
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Y. Tang
P. Reed
T. Wagener
spellingShingle Y. Tang
P. Reed
T. Wagener
How effective and efficient are multiobjective evolutionary algorithms at hydrologic model calibration?
Hydrology and Earth System Sciences
author_facet Y. Tang
P. Reed
T. Wagener
author_sort Y. Tang
title How effective and efficient are multiobjective evolutionary algorithms at hydrologic model calibration?
title_short How effective and efficient are multiobjective evolutionary algorithms at hydrologic model calibration?
title_full How effective and efficient are multiobjective evolutionary algorithms at hydrologic model calibration?
title_fullStr How effective and efficient are multiobjective evolutionary algorithms at hydrologic model calibration?
title_full_unstemmed How effective and efficient are multiobjective evolutionary algorithms at hydrologic model calibration?
title_sort how effective and efficient are multiobjective evolutionary algorithms at hydrologic model calibration?
publisher Copernicus Publications
series Hydrology and Earth System Sciences
issn 1027-5606
1607-7938
publishDate 2006-01-01
description This study provides a comprehensive assessment of state-of-the-art evolutionary multiobjective optimization (EMO) tools' relative effectiveness in calibrating hydrologic models. The relative computational efficiency, accuracy, and ease-of-use of the following EMO algorithms are tested: Epsilon Dominance Nondominated Sorted Genetic Algorithm-II (ε-NSGAII), the Multiobjective Shuffled Complex Evolution Metropolis algorithm (MOSCEM-UA), and the Strength Pareto Evolutionary Algorithm 2 (SPEA2). This study uses three test cases to compare the algorithms' performances: (1) a standardized test function suite from the computer science literature, (2) a benchmark hydrologic calibration test case for the Leaf River near Collins, Mississippi, and (3) a computationally intensive integrated surface-subsurface model application in the Shale Hills watershed in Pennsylvania. One challenge and contribution of this work is the development of a methodology for comprehensively comparing EMO algorithms that have different search operators and randomization techniques. Overall, SPEA2 attained competitive to superior results for most of the problems tested in this study. The primary strengths of the SPEA2 algorithm lie in its search reliability and its diversity preservation operator. The biggest challenge in maximizing the performance of SPEA2 lies in specifying an effective archive size without a priori knowledge of the Pareto set. In practice, this would require significant trial-and-error analysis, which is problematic for more complex, computationally intensive calibration applications. ε-NSGAII appears to be superior to MOSCEM-UA and competitive with SPEA2 for hydrologic model calibration. ε-NSGAII's primary strength lies in its ease-of-use due to its dynamic population sizing and archiving which lead to rapid convergence to very high quality solutions with minimal user input. MOSCEM-UA is best suited for hydrologic model calibration applications that have small parameter sets and small model evaluation times. In general, it would be expected that MOSCEM-UA's performance would be met or exceeded by either SPEA2 or ε-NSGAII.
url http://www.hydrol-earth-syst-sci.net/10/289/2006/hess-10-289-2006.pdf
work_keys_str_mv AT ytang howeffectiveandefficientaremultiobjectiveevolutionaryalgorithmsathydrologicmodelcalibration
AT preed howeffectiveandefficientaremultiobjectiveevolutionaryalgorithmsathydrologicmodelcalibration
AT twagener howeffectiveandefficientaremultiobjectiveevolutionaryalgorithmsathydrologicmodelcalibration
_version_ 1725579545089671168