arXiv ScienceSearch

arXiv · 1909.00247

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

Abstract

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.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Georgia Papacharalampous, Hristos Tyralis, Demetris Koutsoyiannis, Alberto Montanari. 2019-08-31. Quantification of predictive uncertainty in hydrological modelling by harnessing the wisdom of the crowd: A large-sample experiment at monthly timescale. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2019.103470

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Surprise Reduction and Nullification in Bayesian and Inverse Bayesian Inference under Ambiguous Prediction-Error Attribution

In non-stationary environments, prediction errors may signal environmental change or transient outliers, and adaptive systems must track such changes without overreacting to outliers. We distinguish surprise reduction, which updates beliefs to fit observations, from surprise nullification, which weakens constraints imposed by the predictive structure, and formalize both within Bayesian and inverse Bayesian (BIB) inference. Belief and likelihood updates are derived from variational objectives sharing a nullification strength, determined endogenously by minimizing surprise under the candidate post-update predictive distribution. In the Gaussian case, nullification expands belief and likelihood variances by a common factor relative to standard Bayesian updating, leaving the ratio unchanged. BIB thus defers attribution of the prediction error, committing to neither latent-state change nor observation-process uncertainty. The nullification strength is carried over as a candidate and is maintained or released according to the predictive surprise of the next observation. In a mean estimation task with outliers and changepoints, no scanned parameter setting of a Sage-Husa-type adaptive Kalman filter, fixed-strength BIB variant, or belief-forgetting-only variant outperforms BIB in both changepoint tracking and post-outlier stability. An oracle-informed reduced Bayesian model tracks changepoints better but is less stable after outliers. Although BIB maintains no explicit hypotheses about changepoints or outliers, it generates event-dependent dynamics. The learning rate increases after changepoints, whereas after outliers, nullification is released, and this increase is suppressed. Deferring attribution and letting subsequent observations differentiate the responses may constitute a principle of adaptive inference in non-stationary environments.

stat.ME

Generalized Ridge Refitting for the Lasso and Prediction Improvement Bounds

We study a class of Lasso based estimators obtained by applying a quadratic correction on the Lasso equicorrelation set. The penalty matrix determines both the magnitude and geometry of the correction and contains, among other cases, the isotropic Lasso--Ridge correction, least squares refitting, Gram proportional interpolation between the Lasso and least squares, and coordinate specific penalties. We first derive a closed form representation and isolate the positive gain component of the resulting prediction improvement. We then control the remaining stochastic linear term in expectation by localizing the random signed equicorrelation model around a deterministic reference support. This yields a finite sample expectation bound that explicitly accounts for the randomness induced by Lasso model selection. The resulting decomposition provides a unified framework for understanding when Lasso based quadratic corrections can improve prediction.

stat.ME

Discretization in covariate-adaptive randomization: gains and losses

Covariate-adaptive randomization(CAR) is widely implemented in clinical trials to balance prognostic covariates across treatment arms. Continuous covariates are often discretized into strata in practice, yet their consequences are not clearly understood. This paper provides a comprehensive study of the impact of discretization on both the CAR design process and the inferential results thereafter. We establish the asymptotic properties of both imbalance measures and treatment effect estimators under discretized and non-discretized settings. Practical recommendations are given on when and how discretization should be employed. We show that discretization in design is generally recommended, as it enhances robustness against model misspecification. However, if the true model is known, the most efficient strategy is to balance covariates according to that model in the design. The theoretical results are corroborated by extensive simulation studies and an empirical application to a diabetes trial dataset. Together, the results clarify the gains and losses of discretization in CAR and pave the way for learning impact of discretization to other designs and beyond.

stat.ME