skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: MMA, A Computer Code for Multi-Model Analysis

Technical Report ·
DOI:https://doi.org/10.2172/920086· OSTI ID:920086

This report documents the Multi-Model Analysis (MMA) computer code. MMA can be used to evaluate results from alternative models of a single system using the same set of observations for all models. As long as the observations, the observation weighting, and system being represented are the same, the models can differ in nearly any way imaginable. For example, they may include different processes, different simulation software, different temporal definitions (for example, steady-state and transient models could be considered), and so on. The multiple models need to be calibrated by nonlinear regression. Calibration of the individual models needs to be completed before application of MMA. MMA can be used to rank models and calculate posterior model probabilities. These can be used to (1) determine the relative importance of the characteristics embodied in the alternative models, (2) calculate model-averaged parameter estimates and predictions, and (3) quantify the uncertainty of parameter estimates and predictions in a way that integrates the variations represented by the alternative models. There is a lack of consensus on what model analysis methods are best, so MMA provides four default methods. Two are based on Kullback-Leibler information, and use the AIC (Akaike Information Criterion) or AICc (second-order-bias-corrected AIC) model discrimination criteria. The other two default methods are the BIC (Bayesian Information Criterion) and the KIC (Kashyap Information Criterion) model discrimination criteria. Use of the KIC criterion is equivalent to using the maximum-likelihood Bayesian model averaging (MLBMA) method. AIC, AICc, and BIC can be derived from Frequentist or Bayesian arguments. The default methods based on Kullback-Leibler information have a number of theoretical advantages, including that they tend to favor more complicated models as more data become available than do the other methods, which makes sense in many situations.

Research Organization:
United States Geological Survey - Nevada, Henderson, Nevada
Sponsoring Organization:
USDOE - National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)
DOE Contract Number:
AI52-07NA28100
OSTI ID:
920086
Report Number(s):
TM 6-E3; TRN: US200803%%70
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English

Similar Records

On Model Selection Criteria in Multimodel Analysis
Journal Article · Fri Mar 21 00:00:00 EDT 2008 · Water Resources Research, 44(3):Art. no. W03428 · OSTI ID:920086

Effects of error covariance structure on estimation of model averaging weights and predictive performance
Journal Article · Tue Jul 23 00:00:00 EDT 2013 · Water Resources Research, 49(9):6029-6047 · OSTI ID:920086

On Evaluation of Recharge Model Uncertainty: a Priori and a Posteriori
Conference · Mon Jan 30 00:00:00 EST 2006 · OSTI ID:920086