Bayesian Analysis of the Impact of Rainfall Data Product on Simulated Slope Failure for North Carolina Locations

In the past decades, many different approaches have been developed in the literature to quantify the load-carrying capacity and geotechnical stability (or the factor of safety, Fs) of variably saturated hillslopes. Much of this work has focused on a deterministic characterization of hillslope stability. Yet, simulated Fs values are subject to considerable uncertainty due to our inability to characterize accurately the soil mantles properties (hydraulic, geotechnical, and geomorphologic) and spatiotemporal variability of the moisture content of the hillslope interior. This is particularly true at larger spatial scales. Thus, uncertainty-incorporating analyses of physically based models of rain-induced landslides are rare in the literature. Such landslide modeling is typically conducted at the hillslope scale using gauge-based rainfall forcing data with rather poor spatiotemporal coverage. For regional landslide modeling, the specific advantages and/or disadvantages of gauge-only, radar-merged and satellite-based rainfall products are not clearly established. Here, we compare and evaluate the performance of the Transient Rainfall Infiltration and Grid-based Regional Slope-stability analysis (TRIGRS) model for three different rainfall products using 112 observed landslides in the period between 2004 and 2011 from the North Carolina Geological Survey database. Our study includes the Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission (TRMM) Multi-satellite Precipitation Analysis Version 7 (TMPA V7), the North American Land Data Assimilation System Phase 2 (NLDAS-2) analysis, and the reference truth Stage IV precipitation. TRIGRS model performance was rather inferior with the use of literature values of the geotechnical parameters and soil hydraulic properties from ROSETTA using soil textural and bulk density data from SSURGO (Soil Survey Geographic database). The performance of TRIGRS improved considerably after Bayesian estimation of the parameters with the DiffeRential Evolution Adaptive Metropolis (DREAM) algorithm using Stage IV precipitation data. Hereto, we use a likelihood function that combines binary slope failure information from landslide event and null periods using multivariate frequency distribution-based metrics such as the false discovery and false omission rates. Our results demonstrate that the Stage IV-inferred TRIGRS parameter distributions generalize well to TMPA and NLDAS-2 precipitation data, particularly at sites with considerably larger TMPA and NLDAS-2 rainfall amounts during landslide events than null periods. TRIGRS model performance is then rather similar for all three rainfall products. At higher elevations, however, the TMPA and NLDAS-2 precipitation volumes are insufficient and their performance with the Stage IV-derived parameter distributions indicates their inability to accurately characterize hillslope stability

Parameter Sensitivity of the Noah-MP Land Surface Model with Dynamic Vegetation

The Noah land surface model with multiple parameterization options (Noah-MP) includes a routine for dynamic simulation of vegetation carbon assimilation and soil carbon decomposition processes. To use remote sensing observations of vegetation to constrain simulations from this model, it is necessary first to understand the sensitivity of the model to its parameters. This is required for efficient parameter estimation, which is both a valuable way to use observations and also a first or concurrent step in many state-updating data assimilation procedures. We use variance decomposition to assess the sensitivity of estimates of sensible heat, latent heat, soil moisture, and net ecosystem exchange made by certain standard Noah-MP configurations that include dynamic simulation of vegetation and carbon to forty-three primary user-specified parameters. This is done using thirty-two years' worth of data from ten international FluxNet sites. Findings indicate that there are five soil parameters and six (or more) vegetation parameters (depending on the model configuration) that act as primary controls on these states and fluxes

Assimilating Remote Sensing Observations of Leaf Area Index and Soil Moisture for Wheat Yield Estimates: An Observing System Simulation Experiment

Observing system simulation experiments were used to investigate ensemble Bayesian state updating data assimilation of observations of leaf area index (LAI) and soil moisture (theta) for the purpose of improving single-season wheat yield estimates with the Decision Support System for Agrotechnology Transfer (DSSAT) CropSim-Ceres model. Assimilation was conducted in an energy-limited environment and a water-limited environment. Modeling uncertainty was prescribed to weather inputs, soil parameters and initial conditions, and cultivar parameters and through perturbations to model state transition equations. The ensemble Kalman filter and the sequential importance resampling filter were tested for the ability to attenuate effects of these types of uncertainty on yield estimates. LAI and theta observations were synthesized according to characteristics of existing remote sensing data, and effects of observation error were tested. Results indicate that the potential for assimilation to improve end-of-season yield estimates is low. Limitations are due to a lack of root zone soil moisture information, error in LAI observations, and a lack of correlation between leaf and grain growth

What Role Does Hydrological Science Play in the Age of Machine Learning?

ABSTRACT: This paper is derived from a keynote talk given at the Google's 2020 Flood Forecasting Meets Machine Learning Workshop. Recent experiments applying deep learning to rainfall‐runoff simulation indicate that there is significantly more information in large‐scale hydrological data sets than hydrologists have been able to translate into theory or models. While there is a growing interest in machine learning in the hydrological sciences community, in many ways, our community still holds deeply subjective and nonevidence‐based preferences for models based on a certain type of “process understanding” that has historically not translated into accurate theory, models, or predictions. This commentary is a call to action for the hydrology community to focus on developing a quantitative understanding of where and when hydrological process understanding is valuable in a modeling discipline increasingly dominated by machine learning. We offer some potential perspectives and preliminary examples about how this might be accomplished