Efficient incorporation of channel cross-section geometry uncertainty into regional and global scale flood inundation models

This paper investigates the challenge of representing structural differences in river channel cross-section geometry for regional to global scale river hydraulic models and the effect this can have on simulations of wave dynamics. Classically, channel geometry is defined using data, yet at larger scales the necessary information and model structures do not exist to take this approach. We therefore propose a fundamentally different approach where the structural uncertainty in channel geometry is represented using a simple parameterization, which could then be estimated through calibration or data assimilation. This paper first outlines the development of a computationally efficient numerical scheme to represent generalised channel shapes using a single parameter, which is then validated using a simple straight channel test case and shown to predict wetted perimeter to within 2% for the channels tested. An application to the River Severn, UK is also presented, along with an analysis of model sensitivity to channel shape, depth and friction. The channel shape parameter was shown to improve model simulations of river level, particularly for more physically plausible channel roughness and depth parameter ranges. Calibrating channel Manning’s coefficient in a rectangular channel provided similar water level simulation accuracy in terms of Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency to a model where friction and shape or depth were calibrated. However, the calibrated Manning coefficient in the rectangular channel model was ~2/3 greater than the likely physically realistic value for this reach and this erroneously slowed wave propagation times through the reach by several hours. Therefore, for large scale models applied in data sparse areas, calibrating channel depth and/or shape may be preferable to assuming a rectangular geometry and calibrating friction alone.

A comparative value of electricity storage within GB market mechanisms

This paper investigates the value of a generic storage system within two GB market mechanisms and one ancillary service provision: the wholesale power market, the Balancing Mechanism and Firm Frequency Response (FFR). Three models are evaluated under perfect foresight and fixed horizon which is subsequently extended to explore the impact of a longer foresight on market revenues. The results show that comparatively, the balancing mechanism represents the highest source of potential revenues followed by the wholesale power market and Firm Frequency Response respectively. Longer horizons show diminishing returns, with the 1 day horizon providing the vast majority of total revenues. However storage power capacity utilization benefits from such long horizons. These results could imply that short horizons are very effective in capturing revenues in both the wholesale market and balancing mechanism whereas sizing of a storage system should take into consideration horizon foresight and accuracy for greater benefit.

Predicting how many animals will be where: how to build, calibrate and evaluate individual-based models

Individual-based models (IBMs) can simulate the actions of individual animals as they interact with one another and the landscape in which they live. When used in spatially-explicit landscapes IBMs can show how populations change over time in response to management actions. For instance, IBMs are being used to design strategies of conservation and of the exploitation of fisheries, and for assessing the effects on populations of major construction projects and of novel agricultural chemicals. In such real world contexts, it becomes especially important to build IBMs in a principled fashion, and to approach calibration and evaluation systematically. We argue that insights from physiological and behavioural ecology offer a recipe for building realistic models, and that Approximate Bayesian Computation (ABC) is a promising technique for the calibration and evaluation of IBMs. IBMs are constructed primarily from knowledge about individuals. In ecological applications the relevant knowledge is found in physiological and behavioural ecology, and we approach these from an evolutionary perspective by taking into account how physiological and behavioural processes contribute to life histories, and how those life histories evolve. Evolutionary life history theory shows that, other things being equal, organisms should grow to sexual maturity as fast as possible, and then reproduce as fast as possible, while minimising per capita death rate. Physiological and behavioural ecology are largely built on these principles together with the laws of conservation of matter and energy. To complete construction of an IBM information is also needed on the effects of competitors, conspecifics and food scarcity; the maximum rates of ingestion, growth and reproduction, and life-history parameters. Using this knowledge about physiological and behavioural processes provides a principled way to build IBMs, but model parameters vary between species and are often difficult to measure. A common solution is to manually compare model outputs with observations from real landscapes and so to obtain parameters which produce acceptable fits of model to data. However, this procedure can be convoluted and lead to over-calibrated and thus inflexible models. Many formal statistical techniques are unsuitable for use with IBMs, but we argue that ABC offers a potential way forward. It can be used to calibrate and compare complex stochastic models and to assess the uncertainty in their predictions. We describe methods used to implement ABC in an accessible way and illustrate them with examples and discussion of recent studies. Although much progress has been made, theoretical issues remain, and some of these are outlined and discussed.

A cautionary note on the use of Ornstein Uhlenbeck models in macroevolutionary studies

Phylogenetic comparative methods are increasingly used to give new insights into the dynamics of trait evolution in deep time. For continuous traits the core of these methods is a suite of models that attempt to capture evolutionary patterns by extending the Brownian constant variance model. However, the properties of these models are often poorly understood, which can lead to the misinterpretation of results. Here we focus on one of these models – the Ornstein Uhlenbeck (OU) model. We show that the OU model is frequently incorrectly favoured over simpler models when using Likelihood ratio tests, and that many studies fitting this model use datasets that are small and prone to this problem. We also show that very small amounts of error in datasets can have profound effects on the inferences derived from OU models. Our results suggest that simulating fitted models and comparing with empirical results is critical when fitting OU and other extensions of the Brownian model. We conclude by making recommendations for best practice in fitting OU models in phylogenetic comparative analyses, and for interpreting the parameters of the OU model.