Next Article in Journal
Synergistic Approach of Remote Sensing and GIS Techniques for Flash-Flood Monitoring and Damage Assessment in Thessaly Plain Area, Greece
Next Article in Special Issue
Analysis of the Effect of Uncertainty in Rainfall-Runoff Models on Simulation Results Using a Simple Uncertainty-Screening Method
Previous Article in Journal
Strategy for Flux Enhancement in Biofilm Ceramic Membrane Bioreactor Applying Prepolymerized and Non-Prepolymerized Inorganic Coagulants
Article Menu
Issue 3 (March) cover image

Export Article

Open AccessArticle

Evaluation of Four GLUE Likelihood Measures and Behavior of Large Parameter Samples in ISPSO-GLUE for TOPMODEL

Institute for Environmental and Spatial Analysis, University of North Georgia, Oakwood, GA 30566, USA
Department of Civil Engineering, Hongik University, Seoul 04066, Korea
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Water 2019, 11(3), 447;
Received: 14 October 2018 / Revised: 19 February 2019 / Accepted: 26 February 2019 / Published: 3 March 2019
PDF [1571 KB, uploaded 3 March 2019]


We tested four likelihood measures including two limits of acceptability and two absolute model residual methods within the generalized likelihood uncertainty estimation (GLUE) framework using the topography model (TOPMODEL). All these methods take the worst performance of all time steps as the likelihood of a model and none of these methods were successful in finding any behavioral models. We believe that reporting this failure is important because it shifted our attention from which likelihood measure to choose to why these four methods failed and how to improve these methods. We also observed how large parameter samples impact the performance of a hybrid uncertainty estimation method, isolated-speciation-based particle swarm optimization (ISPSO)-GLUE using the Nash–Sutcliffe (NS) coefficient. Unlike GLUE with random sampling, ISPSO-GLUE provides traditional calibrated parameters as well as uncertainty analysis, so over-conditioning the model parameters on the calibration data can affect its uncertainty analysis results. ISPSO-GLUE showed similar performance to GLUE with a lot less model runs, but its uncertainty bounds enclosed less observed flows. However, both methods failed in validation. These findings suggest that ISPSO-GLUE can be affected by over-calibration after a long evolution of samples and imply that there is a need for a likelihood measure that can better explain uncertainties from different sources without making statistical assumptions. View Full-Text
Keywords: generalized likelihood uncertainty estimation; hydrologic modeling; uncertainty analysis generalized likelihood uncertainty estimation; hydrologic modeling; uncertainty analysis

Figure 1

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited (CC BY 4.0).

Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Cho, H.; Park, J.; Kim, D. Evaluation of Four GLUE Likelihood Measures and Behavior of Large Parameter Samples in ISPSO-GLUE for TOPMODEL. Water 2019, 11, 447.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics



[Return to top]
Water EISSN 2073-4441 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top