Robustness and Uncertainty: Applications for Policy in Climate and Hydrological Modeling

Abstract:

Policymakers must often decide how to proceed when presented with conflicting simulation data from hydrological, climatological, and geological models. While laboratory sciences often appeal to the reproducibility of results to argue for the validity of their conclusions, simulations cannot use this strategy for a number of pragmatic and methodological reasons. However, robustness of predictions and causal structures can serve the same function for simulations as reproducibility does for laboratory experiments and field observations in either adjudicating between conflicting results or showing that there is insufficient justification to externally validate the results. Additionally, an interpretation of the argument from robustness is presented that involves appealing to the convergence of many well-built and diverse models rather than the more common version which involves appealing to the probability that one of a set of models is likely to be true. This interpretation strengthens the case for taking robustness as an additional requirement for the validation of simulation results and ultimately supports the idea that computer simulations can provide information about the world that is just as trustworthy as data from more traditional laboratory studies and field observations. Understanding the importance of robust results for the validation of simulation data is especially important for policymakers making decisions on the basis of potentially conflicting models. Applications will span climate, hydrological, and hydroclimatological models.