Paper detail

Quantification of predictive uncertainty in hydrological modelling by harnessing the wisdom of the crowd: A large-sample experiment at monthly timescale

Predictive hydrological uncertainty can be quantified by using ensemble methods. If properly formulated, these methods can offer improved predictive performance by combining multiple predictions. In this work, we use 50-year-long monthly time series observed in 270 catchments in the United States to explore the performances provided by an ensemble learning post-processing methodology for issuing probabilistic hydrological predictions. This methodology allows the utilization of flexible quantile regression models for exploiting information about the hydrological model's error. Its key differences with respect to basic two-stage hydrological post-processing methodologies using the same type of regression models are that (a) instead of a single point hydrological prediction it generates a large number of "sister predictions" (yet using a single hydrological model), and that (b) it relies on the concept of combining probabilistic predictions via simple quantile averaging. A major hydrological modelling challenge is obtaining probabilistic predictions that are simultaneously reliable and associated to prediction bands that are as narrow as possible; therefore, we assess both these desired properties of the predictions by computing their coverage probabilities, average widths and average interval scores. The results confirm the usefulness of the proposed methodology and its larger robustness with respect to basic two-stage post-processing methodologies. Finally, this methodology is empirically proven to harness the "wisdom of the crowd" in terms of average interval score, i.e., the average of the individual predictions combined by this methodology scores no worse -- usually better -- than the average of the scores of the individual predictions.

preprint2020arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.