Comparing Bayesian Model Averaging and Reliability Ensemble Averaging in Post-Processing Runoff Projections under Climate Change

This study investigated the strength and limitations of two widely used multi-model averaging frameworks—Bayesian model averaging (BMA) and reliability ensemble averaging (REA), in post-processing runoff projections derived from coupled hydrological models and climate downscaling models. The perform...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Kai Duan, Xiaola Wang, Bingjun Liu, Tongtiegang Zhao, Xiaohong Chen
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: MDPI AG 2021-08-01
Series:Water
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4441/13/15/2124
id doaj-073599027f7f44a0ad1653ff8a53ce2d
record_format Article
spelling doaj-073599027f7f44a0ad1653ff8a53ce2d2021-08-06T15:34:08ZengMDPI AGWater2073-44412021-08-01132124212410.3390/w13152124Comparing Bayesian Model Averaging and Reliability Ensemble Averaging in Post-Processing Runoff Projections under Climate ChangeKai Duan0Xiaola Wang1Bingjun Liu2Tongtiegang Zhao3Xiaohong Chen4School of Civil Engineering, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, ChinaSchool of Civil Engineering, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, ChinaSchool of Civil Engineering, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, ChinaSchool of Civil Engineering, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, ChinaSchool of Civil Engineering, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, ChinaThis study investigated the strength and limitations of two widely used multi-model averaging frameworks—Bayesian model averaging (BMA) and reliability ensemble averaging (REA), in post-processing runoff projections derived from coupled hydrological models and climate downscaling models. The performance and weight distributions of five model ensembles were thoroughly compared, including simple equal-weight averaging, BMA, and REAs optimizing mean (REA-mean), maximum (REA-max), and minimum (REA-min) monthly runoff. The results suggest that REA and BMA both can synthesize individual models’ diverse skills with comparable reliability, despite of their different averaging strategies and assumptions. While BMA weighs candidate models by their predictive skills in the baseline period, REA also forces the model ensembles to approximate a convergent projection towards the long-term future. The type of incorporation of the uncertain future climate in REA weighting criteria, as well as the differences in parameter estimation (i.e., the expectation maximization (EM) algorithm in BMA and the Markov Chain Monte Carlo sampling method in REA), tend to cause larger uncertainty ranges in the weight distributions of REA ensembles. Moreover, our results show that different averaging objectives could cause much larger discrepancy than that induced by different weighting criteria or parameter estimation algorithms. Among the three REA ensembles, REA-max most resembled BMA because the EM algorithm of BMA converges to the minimum aggregated error, and thus emphasize the simulation of high flows. REA-min achieved better performance in terms of inter-annual temporal pattern, yet at the cost of compromising accuracy in capturing mean behaviors. Caution should be taken to strike a balance among runoff features of interest.https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4441/13/15/2124runoff projectionprobabilistic multi-model ensembleBayesian model averagingreliability ensemble averagingclimate change
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Kai Duan
Xiaola Wang
Bingjun Liu
Tongtiegang Zhao
Xiaohong Chen
spellingShingle Kai Duan
Xiaola Wang
Bingjun Liu
Tongtiegang Zhao
Xiaohong Chen
Comparing Bayesian Model Averaging and Reliability Ensemble Averaging in Post-Processing Runoff Projections under Climate Change
Water
runoff projection
probabilistic multi-model ensemble
Bayesian model averaging
reliability ensemble averaging
climate change
author_facet Kai Duan
Xiaola Wang
Bingjun Liu
Tongtiegang Zhao
Xiaohong Chen
author_sort Kai Duan
title Comparing Bayesian Model Averaging and Reliability Ensemble Averaging in Post-Processing Runoff Projections under Climate Change
title_short Comparing Bayesian Model Averaging and Reliability Ensemble Averaging in Post-Processing Runoff Projections under Climate Change
title_full Comparing Bayesian Model Averaging and Reliability Ensemble Averaging in Post-Processing Runoff Projections under Climate Change
title_fullStr Comparing Bayesian Model Averaging and Reliability Ensemble Averaging in Post-Processing Runoff Projections under Climate Change
title_full_unstemmed Comparing Bayesian Model Averaging and Reliability Ensemble Averaging in Post-Processing Runoff Projections under Climate Change
title_sort comparing bayesian model averaging and reliability ensemble averaging in post-processing runoff projections under climate change
publisher MDPI AG
series Water
issn 2073-4441
publishDate 2021-08-01
description This study investigated the strength and limitations of two widely used multi-model averaging frameworks—Bayesian model averaging (BMA) and reliability ensemble averaging (REA), in post-processing runoff projections derived from coupled hydrological models and climate downscaling models. The performance and weight distributions of five model ensembles were thoroughly compared, including simple equal-weight averaging, BMA, and REAs optimizing mean (REA-mean), maximum (REA-max), and minimum (REA-min) monthly runoff. The results suggest that REA and BMA both can synthesize individual models’ diverse skills with comparable reliability, despite of their different averaging strategies and assumptions. While BMA weighs candidate models by their predictive skills in the baseline period, REA also forces the model ensembles to approximate a convergent projection towards the long-term future. The type of incorporation of the uncertain future climate in REA weighting criteria, as well as the differences in parameter estimation (i.e., the expectation maximization (EM) algorithm in BMA and the Markov Chain Monte Carlo sampling method in REA), tend to cause larger uncertainty ranges in the weight distributions of REA ensembles. Moreover, our results show that different averaging objectives could cause much larger discrepancy than that induced by different weighting criteria or parameter estimation algorithms. Among the three REA ensembles, REA-max most resembled BMA because the EM algorithm of BMA converges to the minimum aggregated error, and thus emphasize the simulation of high flows. REA-min achieved better performance in terms of inter-annual temporal pattern, yet at the cost of compromising accuracy in capturing mean behaviors. Caution should be taken to strike a balance among runoff features of interest.
topic runoff projection
probabilistic multi-model ensemble
Bayesian model averaging
reliability ensemble averaging
climate change
url https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4441/13/15/2124
work_keys_str_mv AT kaiduan comparingbayesianmodelaveragingandreliabilityensembleaveraginginpostprocessingrunoffprojectionsunderclimatechange
AT xiaolawang comparingbayesianmodelaveragingandreliabilityensembleaveraginginpostprocessingrunoffprojectionsunderclimatechange
AT bingjunliu comparingbayesianmodelaveragingandreliabilityensembleaveraginginpostprocessingrunoffprojectionsunderclimatechange
AT tongtiegangzhao comparingbayesianmodelaveragingandreliabilityensembleaveraginginpostprocessingrunoffprojectionsunderclimatechange
AT xiaohongchen comparingbayesianmodelaveragingandreliabilityensembleaveraginginpostprocessingrunoffprojectionsunderclimatechange
_version_ 1721217226030186496