Demonstration of risk based, goal driven framework for hydrological field campaigns and inverse modeling with case studies

There are several stages in any hydrological modeling campaign, including: formulation and analysis of a priori information, data acquisition through field campaigns, inverse modeling, and forward modeling and prediction of some environmental performance metric (EPM). The EPM being predicted could be, for example, contaminant concentration, plume travel time, or aquifer recharge rate. These predictions often have significant bearing on some decision that must be made. Examples include: how to allocate limited remediation resources between multiple contaminated groundwater sites, where to place a waste repository site, and what extraction rates can be considered sustainable in an aquifer. Providing an answer to these questions depends on predictions of EPMs using forward models as well as levels of uncertainty related to these predictions. Uncertainty in model parameters, such as hydraulic conductivity, leads to uncertainty in EPM predictions. Often, field campaigns and inverse modeling efforts are planned and undertaken with reduction of parametric uncertainty as the objective. The tool of hypothesis testing allows this to be taken one step further by considering uncertainty reduction in the ultimate prediction of the EPM as the objective and gives a rational basis for weighing costs and benefits at each stage. When using the tool of statistical hypothesis testing, the EPM is cast into a binary outcome. This is formulated as null and alternative hypotheses, which can be accepted and rejected with statistical formality. When accounting for all sources of uncertainty at each stage, the level of significance of this test provides a rational basis for planning, optimization, and evaluation of the entire campaign. Case-specific information, such as consequences prediction error and site-specific costs can be used in establishing selection criteria based on what level of risk is deemed acceptable. This framework is demonstrated and discussed using various synthetic case studies. The case studies involve contaminated aquifers where a decision must be made based on prediction of when a contaminant will arrive at a given location. The EPM, in this case contaminant travel time, is cast into the hypothesis testing framework. The null hypothesis states that the contaminant plume will arrive at the specified location before a critical value of time passes, and the alternative hypothesis states that the plume will arrive after the critical time passes. Different field campaigns are analyzed based on effectiveness in reducing the probability of selecting the wrong hypothesis, which in this case corresponds to reducing uncertainty in the prediction of plume arrival time. To examine the role of inverse modeling in this framework, case studies involving both Maximum Likelihood parameter estimation and Bayesian inversion are used.