Articles | Volume 11, issue 5
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-1873-2018
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-1873-2018
Methods for assessment of models
 | 
15 May 2018
Methods for assessment of models |  | 15 May 2018

The SPAtial EFficiency metric (SPAEF): multiple-component evaluation of spatial patterns for optimization of hydrological models

Julian Koch, Mehmet Cüneyd Demirel, and Simon Stisen

Related authors

Nitrate reduction in groundwater as an overlooked source of agricultural CO2 emissions
Hyojin Kim, Julian Koch, Birgitte Hansen, and Rasmus Jakobsen
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3706,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3706, 2024
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Biogeosciences (BG).
Short summary
Data-driven modelling of hydraulic-head time series: results and lessons learned from the 2022 Groundwater Time Series Modelling Challenge
Raoul A. Collenteur, Ezra Haaf, Mark Bakker, Tanja Liesch, Andreas Wunsch, Jenny Soonthornrangsan, Jeremy White, Nick Martin, Rui Hugman, Ed de Sousa, Didier Vanden Berghe, Xinyang Fan, Tim J. Peterson, Jānis Bikše, Antoine Di Ciacca, Xinyue Wang, Yang Zheng, Maximilian Nölscher, Julian Koch, Raphael Schneider, Nikolas Benavides Höglund, Sivarama Krishna Reddy Chidepudi, Abel Henriot, Nicolas Massei, Abderrahim Jardani, Max Gustav Rudolph, Amir Rouhani, J. Jaime Gómez-Hernández, Seifeddine Jomaa, Anna Pölz, Tim Franken, Morteza Behbooei, Jimmy Lin, and Rojin Meysami
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 5193–5208, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-5193-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-5193-2024, 2024
Short summary
CAMELS-DK: Hydrometeorological Time Series and Landscape Attributes for 3330 Catchments in Denmark
Jun Liu, Julian Koch, Simon Stisen, Lars Troldborg, Anker Lajer Højberg, Hans Thodsen, Mark F. T. Hansen, and Raphael J. M. Schneider
Earth Syst. Sci. Data Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-292,https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-292, 2024
Revised manuscript under review for ESSD
Short summary
A national-scale hybrid model for enhanced streamflow estimation – consolidating a physically based hydrological model with long short-term memory (LSTM) networks
Jun Liu, Julian Koch, Simon Stisen, Lars Troldborg, and Raphael J. M. Schneider
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 2871–2893, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-2871-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-2871-2024, 2024
Short summary
Assessing the impact of climate change on landslides near Vejle, Denmark, using public data
Kristian Svennevig, Julian Koch, Marie Keiding, and Gregor Luetzenburg
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 1897–1911, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-1897-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-1897-2024, 2024
Short summary

Related subject area

Hydrology
The global water resources and use model WaterGAP v2.2e: description and evaluation of modifications and new features
Hannes Müller Schmied, Tim Trautmann, Sebastian Ackermann, Denise Cáceres, Martina Flörke, Helena Gerdener, Ellen Kynast, Thedini Asali Peiris, Leonie Schiebener, Maike Schumacher, and Petra Döll
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8817–8852, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8817-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8817-2024, 2024
Short summary
Generalised drought index: a novel multi-scale daily approach for drought assessment
João António Martins Careto, Rita Margarida Cardoso, Ana Russo, Daniela Catarina André Lima, and Pedro Miguel Matos Soares
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8115–8139, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8115-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8115-2024, 2024
Short summary
Development and performance of a high-resolution surface wave and storm surge forecast model: application to a large lake
Laura L. Swatridge, Ryan P. Mulligan, Leon Boegman, and Shiliang Shan
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 7751–7766, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7751-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7751-2024, 2024
Short summary
Deep dive into hydrologic simulations at global scale: harnessing the power of deep learning and physics-informed differentiable models (δHBV-globe1.0-hydroDL)
Dapeng Feng, Hylke Beck, Jens de Bruijn, Reetik Kumar Sahu, Yusuke Satoh, Yoshihide Wada, Jiangtao Liu, Ming Pan, Kathryn Lawson, and Chaopeng Shen
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 7181–7198, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7181-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7181-2024, 2024
Short summary
PyEt v1.3.1: a Python package for the estimation of potential evapotranspiration
Matevž Vremec, Raoul A. Collenteur, and Steffen Birk
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 7083–7103, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7083-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7083-2024, 2024
Short summary

Cited articles

Alexandrov, G. A., Ames, D., Bellocchi, G., Bruen, M., Crout, N., Erechtchoukova, M., Hildebrandt, A., Hoffman, F., Jackisch, C., Khaiter, P., Mannina, G., Matsunaga, T., Purucker, S. T., Rivington, M., and Samaniego, L.: Technical assessment and evaluation of environmental models and software: Letter to the Editor, Environ. Model. Softw., 26, 328–336, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2010.08.004, 2011. 
Brown, B. G., Gotway, J. H., Bullock, R., Gilleland, E., Fowler, T., Ahijevych, D., and Jensen, T.: The Model Evaluation Tools (MET): Community tools for forecast evaluation, in: Preprints, 25th Conf. on International Interactive Information and Processing Systems (IIPS) for Meteorology, Oceanography, and Hydrology, Phoenix, AZ, Amer. Meteor. Soc. A, Vol. 9, 2009. 
Clark, M. P., Kavetski, D., and Fenicia, F.: Pursuing the method of multiple working hypotheses for hydrological modeling, Water Resour. Res., 47, W09301, https://doi.org/10.1029/2010WR009827, 2011. 
Cloke, H. L. and Pappenberger, F.: Evaluating forecasts of extreme events for hydrological applications: An approach for screening unfamiliar performance measures, Meteorol. Appl., 15, 181–197, 2008. 
Download
Short summary
Our work addresses a key challenge in earth system modelling: how to optimally exploit the information contained in satellite remote sensing observations in the calibration of such models. For this we thoroughly test a number of measures that quantify the fit between an observed and a simulated spatial pattern. We acknowledge the difficulties associated with such a comparison and suggest using measures that regard multiple aspects of spatial information, i.e. magnitude and variability.