Validation Limitations

The current validation package is a Phase 1 verification and controlled-dynamics campaign. It confirms that the model equations, storage ledgers, forcing interpretation, routing options, and boundary conditions behave as expected in cases with known references.

It is not a substitute for field calibration, uncertainty analysis, or site-specific observational validation.

Evidence Boundaries

Some hydrodynamic and groundwater cases use numerical references. These are valuable implementation checks, especially when analytical solutions are not available, but they should be reported separately from analytical validation.

Applied examples such as Stanford are useful demonstrations of workflow and model setup. They are not analytical validation cases unless they are paired with observations, calibrated/inverse-modeled truth, or another defensible reference.

Neal (2012) Subgrid Model Recession

The Neal (2012) channel-subgrid benchmarks reproduce in-bank routing, floodplain activation, peak discharge, and maximum inundation extent within the tested geometries. A coarse channel cell has one representative water level. Water stored on internal benches or the external floodplain therefore cannot recede independently from the embedded channel. In the staged benchmark, this causes the coarse Neal (2012) floodplain to become dry earlier than the fine-grid numerical reference. Applications in which late floodplain drainage controls the result should evaluate recession timing against observations or a finer hydraulic simulation.