Add Data Assimilation

[Daafip]

As part of my Master Thesis with @RolfHut I'll be working on a framework to run data assimilation on eWaterCycle. My final usecase is the use Particle Filters to assimilate streamflow in the HBV model in the CAMELS catchments. But the goal is to have it working such that any type of Data Assimilation can be added.

There has been some experimenting in the past, but more to show that is it is possible.

Looking at the requirements of the different Data Assimilation methods currently used (PF, EnKF, ES, ES-MDA, IES ), I designed the following work flow: Which I've started implementing here (still experimental currently, but running).

My main question is where should be integrate this into eWaterCycle?

From a disucssion today with @RolfHut & @BSchilperoort we thought of adding it as an entry point to ewatercycle.util? This way users see it as an extra untility function.

Curious to hear your thoughts on this!

[sverhoeven]

I like the idea of having data assimilation functionality inside the ewatercycle package. Having it in its own module like ewatercycle.assimilation would make it easier to find, use, document and test.

[RolfHut]

can we use the plugin way of working to have ewatercycle.utils.DA ?

[BSchilperoort]

My preference would be to make data assimilation a plugin. This way it can be its own self-contained package, which can make development easier and more streamlined.

The downside is that it's another package that needs to be installed, and that the documentation for ewatercycle becomes more fractured.

[Daafip]

The underlying discussion is then do we want a Data Assimilation package that runs eWaterCycle hydrological models (plugin ewatercycle.utils.DA) or do we want functionality within which allows data assimilation in eWaterCycle (ewatercycle.assimilation)? Both have benefits and drawbacks in my opinion.

[RolfHut]

(Maybe git is not the right place for this, but...)

I think that describing (in order):

• what we want from DA in eWaterCycle (requirements)?
• what those benefits and drawbacks are per option and how they map onto the requirements?
• thus which one we choose

will be an important part of your thesis (design choices chapter or something like that), so if you write that out, we can make a final decision on what it will be. (I know where my vote is going to be, but am more than open to be convinced that I'm wrong)

[Peter9192]

Nice discussion.

I'm not so keen on organising plugins under utils. Perhaps create ewatercycle.plugins if you want to go that route? Much like

If we decide to integrate it with ewatercycle itself, we could make it an optional dependency group (and perhaps we could do the same for esmvalcore @BSchilperoort ). Then you would get pip install ewatercycle[da,forcing], much like xarray

[RolfHut]

This seems like a V2 vs V3 thing: if we want to go the xarray way, we need to overhaul the entire structure, so V3. But @Daafip needs to work with DA before that, so for now I suggest a minor release in V2 (2.1?) where DA is added to the utils.

[Peter9192]

That's fine with me. It might also make it easier to see which option is most appropriate. Note that adding DA as a plugin does not require a V3, but adding it to 2.1 and then changing it for a next release would. So we might want to warn that the DA part is unstable for now, if we include it in a release.

[Daafip]

But @Daafip needs to work with DA before that

From my side a standalone python package is okay for now, thats how i'm currently developing and testing it. Its better to nicely integrate it for an end user and keep it all together, but for the purpose of my thesis there is no rush.

[Daafip]

From my side a standalone python package is okay

I've developed it as the ewatercycle-da package which is availible through pip. Currently, I've tested it extensively for particle filtering data assimilation method and with the HBV model.

Futher development would include a second or third data assmilation method and testing with more model to ensure these are all compatible. This is however beyond my reach for the time being. I've also added some thoughts to consider in future development in the issues section of the ewatercycle-da repo.

The added benefit it would add when integrating ewatercycle-da into the main eWaterCycle package, aside from adding data assimilation, is that I've implemented parallelisation by default. This would make running a variety of models at once or calibration of models much easier & faster for the user.