Environmental Modeling

Model Basics

What a model should provide?

Better understanding
Forecasting potential
Physical basis

Models should form a

bridge between the
observation scale and
the larger scales at which
we seek explanation

What makes a good model?

Physical basis
Simplicity
Generality and richness
Potential for scaling up and down

Read: Kirkby, M.J., 1996. A role for theoretical models in

geomorphology?. The Scientific Nature of Geomorphology, Chapter 10.

Systems Modeling

System
a set of objects together with relationships between the
objects and their attributes, or a set of objects and the
common processes by which they interact

objects are usually landscape elements

relationships are geomorphic processes
attributes are physical properties

components of the system will depend on the relationships

that are considered important or relevant

model is a simplification of a system that is assumed to

exist in the real world
Since it will be based on selected parts of a system, the model
will always be incorrect to some degree

Systems Modeling

Types of systems:
isolated: assumed to have boundaries that prevent the import
or export of energy and mass;

closed: import or export of energy but not mass; the earth is

closed to closed and some geomorphic systems can be
modelled as if they are (e.g. an internal drainage basin)

open: both energy and mass move freely across system

boundaries, includes most of the natural world

Systems Modeling

Types of systems:
black box: nothing known except the relationship between
input and output

grey box: structure is known (subsystems considered), but no

detailed knowledge or investigation
white box: subsystems, storages and flows known and
investigated in detail

Mathematical Modeling

Allows ideas to be expressed with great precision

demands a great deal of knowledge about the phenomenon

Precision and lack of ambiguity: mathematical models have

internal logic (one step leads logically to another), and thus
the primary source of error is external logic,
i.e. the assumptions required so that the model can be
expressed mathematically
In geomorphology, these assumption are often very
constraining or even unrealistic given our incomplete
understanding of geomorphic systems.

Mathematical Modeling

The use of mathematics provides the option of modeling:

deterministic
where one physical or chemical conditions leads uniquely from
another)
With the recognition the natural world is deterministic but too
complex to be modeled as such

probabilistic
a degree of randomness and therefore variability is introduced

Mathematical modeling has been out of the mainstream of

geomorphological research with the emphasis on process
observation and an inferential inductive methodology

Mathematical modeling is more the domain of the

engineering community

Mathematical Modeling

Simulation models
designed to reproduce the behavior of a natural system as
accurately as possible
designed to make accurate numerical predictions
modeler includes all the processes that affect the behavior of
the system and tries to represent them numerically as
accurately as possible

Exploratory models
high degree of simplification

Quantitative accuracy is not

important

modeler leaves out as many processes as possible in an

attempt to determine the mechanisms that are essential in
producing the basic behavior in question
use the simplest numerical representation of the processes

Mathematical Modeling

A new modeling strategy is

to make robust predictions
that do not depend on the
details of the formal
representations of the
processes in the model

Rather the predictions result

from the most general
aspects of the model
interactions

Testing such predictions can

falsify the basic hypotheses
the model is designed to
explore

Model Evaluation

Evaluation of systems modelling

the greatest strength is the consistent structure across a range
of application, complexity and techniques
the use of symbols is powerful means of simplification and
abstraction and thereby enables the use of mathematical
symbols

greatest weakness if the choice was system components which

is arbitrary and unscientific (there is no standard approach) and
influences are further analysis and interpretation

Model Evaluation

Evaluation of systems modelling

similar to the problem of distinguishing between core and
peripheral variables is identifying the limits of the system, that is,
defining boundaries
systems models often are used just to present what is already
known, that is, to summarize relationships by presenting them
diagrammatically; this is problem of application and not the
methodology; systems models should be related to theory by
displaying new relationships and serving to generate hypotheses

system models are abstractions not reality, they must be tied to

theory and treated as simplifications with limitations

5 Myths of Math. Models

A model is verified when it predicts observed features of

landscapes
true functioning of a system is never known
geomorphic systems are open but models require boundaries
history of the boundary conditions and forcings, and the initial
conditions are important to the development of a landscape
model is only valid for very specific spatial and temporal scales
(not necessarily transferable)
equifinality- same feature by different processes

The function of a model is to make quantitative predictions for

comparison with nature
unverified models serve as deductive tools that help guide the
search for new observations (see adaptive management)
process of model-building is a valuable exercise that forces rigor in
our hypotheses and interpretations
Highlight errors of understanding and concept

5 Myths of Math. Models

Applied
geomorphology
A rejected model is a failed experiment
deals with
guide the search for new observations
complex systems
part of the incremental steps of geomorphology and incomplete
models

Complex models must be used to yield complex results

models should start small dealing with only the relevant
processes

Complex mathematical models results should agree with

guiding principles of behavior
model results need not always make sense
playing with a mathematical model can generated
unanticipated surprises that reveal errors in conceptual
reasoning
by predicting new types of behavior, such surprises help to
enhance insight and generate new hypotheses

Limitations of Model
Prediction
Read: Haff, P., 1996. Limitations on predictive
modeling in geomorphology The Scientific Nature of
Geomorphology, Chapter 14.

Model Imperfection

Incremental improvement in sediment transport models at the

laboratory scale will not necessarily add to our ability to make
predictions of sediment transport at a large scale

qn
e
F = ( gm d ) xC c N
*
m s wo
dq
d2

( )
y
d

Models are limited by the spatial and

temporal variability in the factors that
influence the abrasion efficiency

A surface does not have a

characteristic emissivity

Process Omission

The larger the

spatial scale of
the environmental
system and the
longer the time
scale of interest,
the greater is the
chance that more
than one
important process
will be present

Initial Conditions
Poor understanding

Statements about a
system that must be
made before a model
can be implemented
Owens Lake:

crust thickness
salt content
size distribution
moisture content
availability of sand at
surface
wind shear

Owens Lake California

Largest fugitive dust source in the
world

Ratio of Vertical Dust Flux to Horizontal Mass Transport Rate vs Shear Velocity
1

Houser (1999)-PM10

10-2

Gillette et al (1997)-PM10
-1

F/q (m )

Nickling et al (1999)-TSP
Nickling and Gillies (1989)-TSP

-4

10

Gillette (1978)-TSP
On Lake- No Feed-PM10
On Lake- With Feed-PM10

10-6

Off Lake- No Feed-PM10

Off Lake- With Feed-PM10

10

-8
-1

10

u* (m/s)

10

Initial Conditions
Sensitivity

Most geomorphic systems are extremely sensitive to initial

conditions

Formation a tidal inlet

by strong overwash
may depend sensitively
on island topography
and shoreface
bathymetry at the time
of a given storm

Creates a strong
dependence on the
sequence of events

External
Forcing

Sediment
Transport

Processes

Morphology

Houser and Greenwood (2003)

Houser, C., and Greenwood, B., Seasonal morphodynamics of a
lacustrine multiple-barred nearshore.
Submitted to Geomorphology,
December 2003 (under consideration).

Houser, C., and Greenwood, B., Onshore migration of a swash bar.

Submitted to Journal of Coastal Research, November 2003 (under
consideration).

Hrms h-1 0.33

Hmax

Hmax

Hsig

Hrms

Outer bar acts as a filter

to the incident wave field
Weakened as outer
bar moves offshore
and lower on the
profile
Inner bar can be
either divergent or
convergent

Subtidal bars tend to exhibit a

convergent behavior
Havg

Unresolved Heterogeneity

In some systems (or scales) predictive capability increases

with increasing size,
one can average over many of the details which make the
system so heterogeneous at small scales

In many systems you cant use simple averages

External Forcing

Geomorphic systems are not in laboratories where the

system is closed

Sediment transport in a fluvial system:

increasing discharge
injection from side channels
slopes falling outside the model boundaries
backwater effects due to stream impoundment
tectonic uplift
base level lowering

Instrumented Studies

Many models are developed using

empirical data as a calibration

Can be considerable bias in the

measurement of environmental
processes:

Depends on:

location of instruments
scale of instrumentation
what instruments are measured
physics of how the instrument make
measurements
When measurements were made
unresolved variability

Cant measure
everywhere at all times

Behavior vs. Process

Process Model:
process-response relationships are only valid for
specific boundary conditions
Vary in both space and time making it difficult to
use as a predictive base

sensitivity to initial condition

unresolved heterogeneity
process omission
model imperfection- ability to transform wave field
and generate currents

Behavioral model:
Statistical models to simulate the variability or
time series of a system over a series of forcing
events
Behavior varies with the processes at the
smaller scale which are moving the system
towards some equilibrium condition
Increasing inaccuracy with increasing space and
time

Misplaced Concreteness

'neglecting the degree of abstraction involved when an actual

entity is considered merely so far as it exemplifies certain
categories of thought'
More generally it is the fallacy involved whenever thinkers forget the
degree of abstraction involved in thought and draw unwarranted
conclusions about concrete actuality.

This fallacy involves thinking something is a 'concrete' reality

when in fact it is merely a belief, opinion or concept about the
way things are.
A false belief in something is a delusion

Misplaced Concreteness

The reductionist approach requires the abstraction

(simplification) of reality in order to identify fundamental features
of the concrete-reality that can be then analyzed and predicted
quantitatively

In this regard, abstraction is assumed to provide reliable

information about the features of the concrete world structure,

scientific statements necessarily involve an external-world

correspondence

The extension of scientific thought to concrete reality is not

perfect
every stage of experiment or analysis involves significant matters of
judgement that in many cases reflect norms for pursuing the science

Misplaced Concreteness

All scientific knowledge is contingent, and the acceptance of a

scientific theory involves an acceptance of the complex network
of contextual definitions that ground it

Research in environmental science is conducted in highly

complex systems that exhibit considerable spatial and temporal
variability in their characteristics, and response to external forces

Although the infinite number of possible arrangements in

environmental systems is more amenable to the study of
individual cases, deductive methodology requires the
development of universal models to explain system behavior

Misplaced Concreteness

In order to develop predictive models this complexity needs to

be simplified (through empirical coefficients) or eliminated
(through scaled models), contrary to the multifaceted nature of
environmental problems

it is of particular concern that science recognizes the contextual

limitations of the models used to describe the systems

Despite the difficulties in developing quantitative models, the use

of mathematics in environmental science is pervasive and
provides prestige to research for its sophistication
without considering whether the model provides an improved
explanation

Misplaced Concreteness

Abstraction in numerical modeling is used for:

wave modeling
slope stability
wind erosion
flood dynamics
contaminant transport in soils
predicting the occurrence or effects of desertification
coastal erosion
impacts of sea-level rise on coastal morphology

models are built on more or less plausible but entirely arbitrary

assumptions, leading to contextually limited conclusions that are
difficult to reconcile in the concrete

Misplaced Concreteness

However, when models and numerical models are presented,

considerable trust is placed in their precision and sophistication,
particularly by policy makers.

Overlooking these uncertainties can lead to damaging

misjudgments in mitigating environmental problems (Stevens,
1998).
Stevens, W.K. (1998) When scientific predictions are so good
theyre bad. New York Times, September 29, 1998

Mitigation of wind erosion:

Despite numerous studies on wind erosion and the plethora of
predictive models that have resulted it is not possible to predict
sediment transport with a high degree of accuracy

Wind Erosion Example

Shear velocity (a measure of the shearing stress at the bed) has

traditionally been used to predict the amount of sand in transport

However, shear velocity relationships are only appropriate in

environments where the supply of erodible material is unlimited
and thus the saltation transport rate is only related to shear
velocity

Since most surface where there is a concern about wind erosion

(e.g. agricultural fields) are supply limited the models developed
are not appropriate, and considerable variation is quite apparent
in the literature

Despite contingent dependencies of the model, recent studies

continue to force data to these models offering empirical
coefficients/exponents rather than identifying the source of the
data scatter.

Misplaced Concreteness

This is not unique to wind erosion studies:

As in most of the environmental sciences these relationships are

forced to data sets without considering the contingent differences
between the data and the theoretical constructs.

Concern for theories and not observation results in the frequent

use of empirical coefficients (externalities) that only recognize
the neglected aspects of the concrete as to minimize
restructuring the basic theory

Despite the inability of shear velocity models to predict erosion

rates in natural systems it is regularly presented as an accurate
model for erosion, particularly to environmental agencies

Misplaced Concreteness

Although a mistaken belief in misplaced concreteness is a

problem in the development and implementation of solutions to
environmental problems,
it is important to recognize that present scientific knowledge could
only have been developed from the research efficiency afforded by
abstraction

It is therefore important that a mistaken belief in abstracted

models and the dangers associated with that belief are
recognized and some cases minimized but not eliminated.

Misplaced Concreteness

Possible approaches to avoiding the fallacy of misplaced

concreteness
explicitly recognize misplaced concreteness in texts and research
papers
weigh the costs of the abstraction to the benefits derived
reduce professional specialization, where particular abstractions are
developed, and appreciation of the concrete is lost to a sole concern
for a single aspect

Many established researchers tend to hold on to their abstracted

focus in spite of a very different or changing reality

Changes only occur as a result of fashion and not when a more

complete understanding comes along

Bauer et al. (1996) offer an alternative approach to minimizing

the dangers associated with misplaced concreteness
Stochastic models that explicitly recognize the indeterminate nature
of environmental systems be used, since the complexity of natural
systems presents an obstacle to the predictive ability of
deterministic models
Stochastic models are based on statistical relationships that
describe the range or variability in the response of a system

These models need to be balanced with deterministic studies

that identify the fundamental controls on the system.

This does not eliminate misplaced concreteness, but ensures

that the researchers do not put a mistaken belief in the accuracy
of these models and gain appreciation of different views in the
concrete

Bauer, B.O., Davidson-Arnott, R.G., Nordstrom, K.F., Ollerhead, J., and

Jackson, N.L. (1996) Indeterminacy in aeolian sediment transport
across beaches. Journal of Coastal Research, 12, 641-653.

Bruun (1962)

Bruun rule
constant profile shape translates landward and upward over time
in response to rising sea level
Upper beach is eroded due to landward translation of the profile
material eroded is transported immediately offshore

L
R=
S
B+h

Retreat
Small rise in sea level will lead to a
substantial shoreline retreat

no net longshore transport of sediment

no significant seaward-directed sediment transport beyond
certain water depths

Bruun Prediction

GA
NY

DE

Erosion

Shoreline Change (R)

Accretion

Model Evaluation

VA LA

Sea level rise

Adapted
from Dean
(1990)

Rosen (1978)

Evaluated Bruun rule along Chesapeake Bay

variation in sea-level rise ranging from -0.46 to 5.43 mm/year
For the entire bay the measured erosion varied by only 3% from
the Bruun equation
eastern shore was +58%
western shore was -7%
Individual counties ranged from +224% to -68%

Western shore

Eastern shore
X=336 km