@@ -6,9 +6,9 @@ as the ensemble constituents. The default ensemble is a normalized weighted sum.
6
6
The usual setup process is shown here, detailed in previous sections of this guide.
7
7
8
8
``` julia
9
- using StatsPlots
10
- using CSV, DataFrames
11
9
using Statistics
10
+ using CSV, DataFrames
11
+ using StatsPlots
12
12
using Streamfall
13
13
14
14
data_dir = joinpath (
@@ -86,7 +86,7 @@ low flows as with GR4J.
86
86
87
87
![ ] ( ../../assets/ensemble_model_comparison_quickplots.png )
88
88
89
- Comparing the temporal cross section:
89
+ Comparing the temporal cross section to get an idea of seasonality :
90
90
91
91
``` julia
92
92
ihacres_xs = temporal_cross_section (burn_dates, burn_obs, ihacres_node. outflow[burn_in: end ]; title= " IHACRES" , yscale= :log10 )
@@ -101,10 +101,11 @@ A reduction in the median error can be seen with extreme errors reduced somewhat
101
101
![ ] ( ../../assets/ensemble_xsection.png )
102
102
103
103
The median error can then be applied to modelled streamflow (on a month-day basis) as a
104
- form of bias correction.
104
+ form of bias correction. Here, the correction factor is capped to -80% and +40% of predicted
105
+ outflows.
105
106
106
107
``` julia
107
- q_star = Streamfall. apply_temporal_correction (ensemble, climate, Qo[:, " 410730" ])
108
+ q_star = Streamfall. apply_temporal_correction (ensemble, climate, Qo[:, " 410730" ]; low_cap = 0.8 , high_cap = 0.4 )
108
109
109
110
bc_ensemble_qp = quickplot (burn_obs, q_star[burn_in: end ], climate; label= " Bias Corrected Ensemble" , log= true )
110
111
@@ -116,16 +117,17 @@ bias_corrected_xs = temporal_cross_section(
116
117
yscale= :log10
117
118
)
118
119
119
- plot (bc_ensemble_qp, bias_corrected_xs; layout= (2 ,1 ), size= (800 , 800 ))
120
+ ens_qp = plot (bc_ensemble_qp, bias_corrected_xs; layout= (2 ,1 ), size= (800 , 800 ))
120
121
```
121
122
122
- While the median error has increased, its variance has reduced significantly. At the same
123
- time, performance at the 75 and 95% CI remain steady relative to the original weighted
124
- ensemble results.
123
+ It can be seen here that low flows are better represented, with a commensurate decrease
124
+ in median error (and its variance). At the same time, performance at the 75 and 95% CI
125
+ remain steady relative to the original weighted ensemble results.
125
126
126
127
![ ] ( ../../assets/ensemble_bias_corrected.png )
127
128
128
129
This ensemble approach may be improved further by:
129
130
130
131
- Using a rolling window to smooth ensemble predictions
131
132
- Defining a custom objective function to target specific conditions
133
+ - Using more advanced ensemble approaches other than the simple weighted mean approach
0 commit comments