- About
- Editorial board
- Articles
- Special issues
- Highlight articles
- Manuscript tracking
- Subscribe to alerts
- Peer-review process
- For authors
- For editors and referees
- EGU publications
Journal cover
Journal topic
Geoscientific Model Development
An interactive open-access journal of the European Geosciences Union
Journal topic
- About
- Editorial board
- Articles
- Special issues
- Highlight articles
- Manuscript tracking
- Subscribe to alerts
- Peer-review process
- For authors
- For editors and referees
- EGU publications
Journal metrics
Journal metrics
IF 5.240
5.768CiteScore
8.9SNIP 1.713
SJR 3.18
index 71h5-index 51
Abstracted/indexed
Abstracted/indexed
GMD | Articles | Volume 11, issue 5
Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 1873–1886, 2018
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-1873-2018
© Author(s) 2018. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-1873-2018
© Author(s) 2018. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 1873–1886, 2018
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-1873-2018
© Author(s) 2018. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-1873-2018
© Author(s) 2018. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
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 et al.
Related authors
Julian Koch, Helen Berger, Hans Jørgen Henriksen, and Torben Obel Sonnenborg
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 23, 4603–4619, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-23-4603-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-23-4603-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
This study explores novel modelling avenues using machine learning in combination with process-based models to predict the shallow water table at high spatial resolution. Due to climate change and anthropogenic impacts, the shallow groundwater is rising in many parts of the world. In order to adapt to risks induced by groundwater flooding, new modelling tools need to emerge. In this study, we found that machine learning is capable of reaching the required accuracy and resolution.
Mehmet C. Demirel, Juliane Mai, Gorka Mendiguren, Julian Koch, Luis Samaniego, and Simon Stisen
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 1299–1315, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-1299-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-1299-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
Satellite data offer great opportunities to improve spatial model predictions by means of spatially oriented model evaluations. In this study, satellite images are used to observe spatial patterns of evapotranspiration at the land surface. These spatial patterns are utilized in combination with streamflow observations in a model calibration framework including a novel spatial performance metric tailored to target the spatial pattern performance of a catchment-scale hydrological model.
Guiomar Ruiz-Pérez, Julian Koch, Salvatore Manfreda, Kelly Caylor, and Félix Francés
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 6235–6251, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-6235-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-6235-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
Plants are shaping the landscape and controlling the hydrological cycle, particularly in arid and semi-arid ecosystems. Remote sensing data appears as an appealing source of information for vegetation monitoring, in particular in areas with a limited amount of available field data. Here, we present an example of how remote sensing data can be exploited in a data-scarce basin. We propose a mathematical methodology that can be used as a springboard for future applications.
Gorka Mendiguren, Julian Koch, and Simon Stisen
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 5987–6005, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-5987-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-5987-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
The present study is focused on the spatial pattern evaluation of two models and describes the similarities and dissimilarities. It also discusses the factors that generate these patterns and proposes similar new approaches to minimize the differences. The study points towards a new approach in which the spatial component of the hydrological model is also calibrated and taken into account.
J. Koch, X. He, K. H. Jensen, and J. C. Refsgaard
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 18, 2907–2923, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-18-2907-2014, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-18-2907-2014, 2014
Raphael Schneider, Hans Jørgen Henriksen, and Simon Stisen
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2019-685, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2019-685, 2020
Revised manuscript under review for HESS
Short summary
Short summary
For groundwater models to deliver reliable results, their parameters often have to be estimated in an optimization process guided by some measure of model performance. In this context, we suggest the use of a novel performance metric, which is less prone to a fit to inadequate observations than the most frequently used metrics based on squared errors. Hence, calibration is more robust to deficiencies in model and observational data, which are common especially in larger scale models.
Kamal Ahmed, Dhanapala A. Sachindra, Shamsuddin Shahid, Mehmet C. Demirel, and Eun-Sung Chung
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 23, 4803–4824, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-23-4803-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-23-4803-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
This study evaluated the performance of 36 CMIP5 GCMs in simulating seasonal precipitation and maximum and minimum temperature over Pakistan using spatial metrics (SPAtial EFficiency, fractions skill score, Goodman–Kruskal's lambda, Cramer's V, Mapcurves, and Kling–Gupta efficiency) for the period 1961–2005. NorESM1-M, MIROC5, BCC-CSM1-1, and ACCESS1-3 were identified as the most suitable GCMs for simulating all three climate variables over Pakistan.
Julian Koch, Helen Berger, Hans Jørgen Henriksen, and Torben Obel Sonnenborg
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 23, 4603–4619, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-23-4603-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-23-4603-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
This study explores novel modelling avenues using machine learning in combination with process-based models to predict the shallow water table at high spatial resolution. Due to climate change and anthropogenic impacts, the shallow groundwater is rising in many parts of the world. In order to adapt to risks induced by groundwater flooding, new modelling tools need to emerge. In this study, we found that machine learning is capable of reaching the required accuracy and resolution.
Mehmet C. Demirel, Juliane Mai, Gorka Mendiguren, Julian Koch, Luis Samaniego, and Simon Stisen
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 1299–1315, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-1299-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-1299-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
Satellite data offer great opportunities to improve spatial model predictions by means of spatially oriented model evaluations. In this study, satellite images are used to observe spatial patterns of evapotranspiration at the land surface. These spatial patterns are utilized in combination with streamflow observations in a model calibration framework including a novel spatial performance metric tailored to target the spatial pattern performance of a catchment-scale hydrological model.
Guiomar Ruiz-Pérez, Julian Koch, Salvatore Manfreda, Kelly Caylor, and Félix Francés
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 6235–6251, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-6235-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-6235-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
Plants are shaping the landscape and controlling the hydrological cycle, particularly in arid and semi-arid ecosystems. Remote sensing data appears as an appealing source of information for vegetation monitoring, in particular in areas with a limited amount of available field data. Here, we present an example of how remote sensing data can be exploited in a data-scarce basin. We propose a mathematical methodology that can be used as a springboard for future applications.
Gorka Mendiguren, Julian Koch, and Simon Stisen
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 5987–6005, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-5987-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-5987-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
The present study is focused on the spatial pattern evaluation of two models and describes the similarities and dissimilarities. It also discusses the factors that generate these patterns and proposes similar new approaches to minimize the differences. The study points towards a new approach in which the spatial component of the hydrological model is also calibrated and taken into account.
R. Guzinski, H. Nieto, S. Stisen, and R. Fensholt
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 19, 2017–2036, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-19-2017-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-19-2017-2015, 2015
Short summary
Short summary
The study compared evapotranspiration (ET) modelled by two remote sensing models and one hydrological model in a river catchment in Denmark. The results show that the spatial patterns of ET produced by the remote sensing models are more similar to each other than to the fluxes produced by the hydrological model. This indicates potential benefits to the hydrological modelling community from integrating spatial information derived through remote sensing methodology into the hydrological models.
M. C. Demirel, M. J. Booij, and A. Y. Hoekstra
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 19, 275–291, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-19-275-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-19-275-2015, 2015
Short summary
Short summary
This paper investigates the skill of 90-day low-flow forecasts using three models. From the results, it appears that all models are prone to over-predict runoff during low-flow periods using ensemble seasonal meteorological forcing. The largest range for 90-day low-flow forecasts is found for the GR4J model. Overall, the uncertainty from ensemble P forecasts has a larger effect on seasonal low-flow forecasts than the uncertainty from ensemble PET forecasts and initial model conditions.
H. Ajami, J. P. Evans, M. F. McCabe, and S. Stisen
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 18, 5169–5179, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-18-5169-2014, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-18-5169-2014, 2014
Short summary
Short summary
A new hybrid approach was developed to reduce the computational burden of the spin-up procedure by using a combination of model simulations and an empirical depth-to-water table function. Results illustrate that the hybrid approach reduced the spin-up period required for an integrated groundwater--surface water--land surface model (ParFlow.CLM) by up to 50%. The methodology is applicable to other coupled or integrated modeling frameworks when initialization from an equilibrium state is required.
J. Koch, X. He, K. H. Jensen, and J. C. Refsgaard
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 18, 2907–2923, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-18-2907-2014, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-18-2907-2014, 2014
Related subject area
Hydrology
Simulator for Hydrologic Unstructured Domains (SHUD v1.0): numerical modeling of watershed hydrology with the finite volume method
HydroMix v1.0: a new Bayesian mixing framework for attributing uncertain hydrological sources
TIER version 1.0: an open-source Topographically InformEd Regression (TIER) model to estimate spatial meteorological fields
Automated Monte Carlo-based quantification and updating of geological uncertainty with borehole data (AutoBEL v1.0)
glmGUI v1.0: an R-based graphical user interface and toolbox for GLM (General Lake Model) simulations
The Canadian Hydrological Model (CHM) v1.0: a multi-scale, multi-extent, variable-complexity hydrological model – design and overview
MFIT 1.0.0: Multiflow inversion of tracer breakthrough curves in fractured and karst aquifers
WAYS v1: a hydrological model for root zone water storage simulation on a global scale
TOPMELT 1.0: a topography-based distribution function approach to snowmelt simulation for hydrological modelling at basin scale
MELPF version 1: Modeling Error Learning based Post-Processor Framework for Hydrologic Models Accuracy Improvement
Beo v1.0: numerical model of heat flow and low-temperature thermochronology in hydrothermal systems
A parallel workflow implementation for PEST version 13.6 in high-performance computing for WRF-Hydro version 5.0: a case study over the midwestern United States
r.sim.terrain 1.0: a landscape evolution model with dynamic hydrology
The probabilistic hydrological MARCSHYDRO (the MARkov Chain System) model: its structure and core version 0.2
A Python-enhanced urban land surface model SuPy (SUEWS in Python, v2019.2): development, deployment and demonstration
The multiscale routing model mRM v1.0: simple river routing at resolutions from 1 to 50 km
Modular Assessment of Rainfall–Runoff Models Toolbox (MARRMoT) v1.2: an open-source, extendable framework providing implementations of 46 conceptual hydrologic models as continuous state-space formulations
Challenges in developing a global gradient-based groundwater model (G3M v1.0) for the integration into a global hydrological model
DECIPHeR v1: Dynamic fluxEs and ConnectIvity for Predictions of HydRology
Terrainbento 1.0: a Python package for multi-model analysis in long-term drainage basin evolution
Discrete k-nearest neighbor resampling for simulating multisite precipitation occurrence and model adaption to climate change
Using observed river flow data to improve the hydrological functioning of the JULES land surface model (vn4.3) used for regional coupled modelling in Great Britain (UKC2)
A General Lake Model (GLM 3.0) for linking with high-frequency sensor data from the Global Lake Ecological Observatory Network (GLEON)
V2Karst V1.1: a parsimonious large-scale integrated vegetation–recharge model to simulate the impact of climate and land cover change in karst regions
GSFLOW–GRASS v1.0.0: GIS-enabled hydrologic modeling of coupled groundwater–surface-water systems
Improvements to the hydrological processes of the Town Energy Balance model (TEB-Veg, SURFEX v7.3) for urban modelling and impact assessment
STORM 1.0: a simple, flexible, and parsimonious stochastic rainfall generator for simulating climate and climate change
The Land surface Data Toolkit (LDT v7.2) – a data fusion environment for land data assimilation systems
The Variable Infiltration Capacity model version 5 (VIC-5): infrastructure improvements for new applications and reproducibility
Developing a global operational seasonal hydro-meteorological forecasting system: GloFAS-Seasonal v1.0
EcH2O-iso 1.0: water isotopes and age tracking in a process-based, distributed ecohydrological model
EDDA 2.0: integrated simulation of debris flow initiation and dynamics considering two initiation mechanisms
PCR-GLOBWB 2: a 5 arcmin global hydrological and water resources model
The design, deployment, and testing of kriging models in GEOframe with SIK-0.9.8
IPA (v1): a framework for agent-based modelling of soil water movement
Improved regional-scale groundwater representation by the coupling of the mesoscale Hydrologic Model (mHM v5.7) to the groundwater model OpenGeoSys (OGS)
tran-SAS v1.0: a numerical model to compute catchment-scale hydrologic transport using StorAge Selection functions
Continuous state-space representation of a bucket-type rainfall-runoff model: a case study with the GR4 model using state-space GR4 (version 1.0)
A hydrological emulator for global applications – HE v1.0.0
Impacts of microtopographic snow redistribution and lateral subsurface processes on hydrologic and thermal states in an Arctic polygonal ground ecosystem: a case study using ELM-3D v1.0
A Landsat-based model for retrieving total suspended solids concentration of estuaries and coasts in China
GLOFRIM v1.0 – A globally applicable computational framework for integrated hydrological–hydrodynamic modelling
Optimizing the parameterization of deep mixing and internal seiches in one-dimensional hydrodynamic models: a case study with Simstrat v1.3
VIC–CropSyst-v2: A regional-scale modeling platform to simulate the nexus of climate, hydrology, cropping systems, and human decisions
lumpR 2.0.0: an R package facilitating landscape discretisation for hillslope-based hydrological models
GLEAM v3: satellite-based land evaporation and root-zone soil moisture
Itzï (version 17.1): an open-source, distributed GIS model for dynamic flood simulation
The Landlab v1.0 OverlandFlow component: a Python tool for computing shallow-water flow across watersheds
Modeling surface water dynamics in the Amazon Basin using MOSART-Inundation v1.0: impacts of geomorphological parameters and river flow representation
r.avaflow v1, an advanced open-source computational framework for the propagation and interaction of two-phase mass flows
Lele Shu, Paul A. Ullrich, and Christopher J. Duffy
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 2743–2762, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-2743-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-2743-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Hydrologic modeling is an essential strategy for understanding and predicting natural flows. The paper introduces the design of Simulator for Hydrologic Unstructured Domains (SHUD), from the conceptual and mathematical description of hydrologic processes in a watershed to the model's computational structures. To demonstrate and validate the model performance, we employ three hydrologic experiments: the V-Catchment experiment, Vauclin's experiment, and a model study of the Cache Creek Watershed.
Harsh Beria, Joshua R. Larsen, Anthony Michelon, Natalie C. Ceperley, and Bettina Schaefli
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 2433–2450, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-2433-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-2433-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
We develop a Bayesian mixing model to address the issue of small sample sizes to describe different sources in hydrological mixing applications. Using composite likelihood functions, the model accounts for an often overlooked bias arising due to unweighted mixing. We test the model efficacy using a series of statistical benchmarking tests and demonstrate its real-life applicability by applying it to a Swiss Alpine catchment to obtain the proportion of groundwater recharged from rain vs. snow.
Andrew J. Newman and Martyn P. Clark
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 1827–1843, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-1827-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-1827-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
This paper introduces the Topographically InformEd Regression (TIER) model, which uses terrain attributes to turn observations of precipitation and temperature into spatial maps. TIER allows our understanding of complex atmospheric processes such as terrain-enhanced precipitation to be modeled in a very simple way. TIER lets users change the model so they can experiment with different ways of making maps. A key conclusion is that small changes in TIER will change the final map.
Zhen Yin, Sebastien Strebelle, and Jef Caers
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 651–672, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-651-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-651-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
We provide completely automated Bayesian evidential learning (AutoBEL) for geological uncertainty quantification. AutoBEL focuses on model falsification, global sensitivity analysis, and statistical learning for joint model uncertainty reduction by borehole data. Application shows fast and robust uncertainty reduction in geological models and predictions for large field cases, showing its applicability in subsurface applications, e.g., groundwater, oil, gas, and geothermal or mineral resources.
Thomas Bueche, Marko Wenk, Benjamin Poschlod, Filippo Giadrossich, Mario Pirastru, and Mark Vetter
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 565–580, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-565-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-565-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
The R-based graphical user interface glmGUI provides tools for pre- and postprocessing of General Lake Model (GLM) simulations. This includes an autocalibration, parameter sensitivity analysis, and several plot options. The model parameters can be analyzed and calibrated for the simulation output variables water temperature and lake level. The toolbox is tested for two sites (lake Ammersee, Germany, and lake Baratz, Italy).
Christopher B. Marsh, John W. Pomeroy, and Howard S. Wheater
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 225–247, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-225-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-225-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
The Canadian Hydrological Model (CHM) is a next-generation distributed model. Although designed to be applied generally, it has a focus for application where cold-region processes, such as snowpacks, play a role in hydrology. A key feature is that it uses a multi-scale surface representation, increasing efficiency. It also enables algorithm comparisons in a flexible structure. Model philosophy, design, and several cold-region-specific examples are described.
Jacques Bodin
Geosci. Model Dev. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2019-286, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2019-286, 2020
Revised manuscript accepted for GMD
Short summary
Short summary
Fractured and karst aquifers constitute important groundwater reservoirs worldwide but are particularly vulnerable to anthropogenic pollution. MFIT is a new GUI-based software for the analytical modeling of artificial tracer tests in such media. It integrates four transport models that are all capable of simulating complex (multimodal and/or heavy-tailed) tracer breakthrough curve responses, and includes advanced tools for the automatic calibration and uncertainty analysis of model parameters.
Ganquan Mao and Junguo Liu
Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 5267–5289, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-5267-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-5267-2019, 2019
Mattia Zaramella, Marco Borga, Davide Zoccatelli, and Luca Carturan
Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 5251–5265, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-5251-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-5251-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
This paper presents TOPMELT, a parsimonious snowpack simulation model integrated into a basin-scale hydrological model. TOPMELT implements the full spatial distribution of clear-sky potential solar radiation by means of a statistical representation: this approach reduces computational burden, which is a key potential advantage when parameter sensitivity and uncertainty estimation procedures are carried out. The model is assessed by examining different resolutions of its domain.
Rui Wu, Lei Yang, Chao Chen, Sajjad Ahmad, Sergiu M. Dascalu, and Frederick C. Harris Jr.
Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 4115–4131, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-4115-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-4115-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
The paper mainly has two contributions. First, a post-processor framework is proposed to improve hydrologic model accuracy. The key is to characterize possible connections between model inputs and errors. Based on results, it is also possible to replace the time-consuming model calibration step using our post-processor framework. Second, a window selection method is proposed to handle nonstationary data. A window size is chosen containing stable data using a measure named
DSproposed by us.
Elco Luijendijk
Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 4061–4073, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-4061-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-4061-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
This paper presents a new model code that can be used to date the flow of hot fluids in the crust and the age of hot springs. It does so by modelling the thermal effects of fluid flow in the subsurface and by comparing the results with low-temperature thermochronology, which is a widely used method to quantify the temperature history of minerals and rocks. The model also demonstrates the effects of the depth and angle of permeable faults on temperatures of hot springs.
Jiali Wang, Cheng Wang, Vishwas Rao, Andrew Orr, Eugene Yan, and Rao Kotamarthi
Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 3523–3539, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-3523-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-3523-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
WRF-Hydro needs to be calibrated to optimize its output with respect to observations. However, when applied to a relatively large domain, both WRF-Hydro simulations and calibrations require intensive computing resources and are best performed in parallel. This study ported an independent calibration tool (parameter estimation tool – PEST) to high-performance computing clusters and adapted it to work with WRF-Hydro. The results show significant speedup for model calibration.
Brendan Alexander Harmon, Helena Mitasova, Anna Petrasova, and Vaclav Petras
Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 2837–2854, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-2837-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-2837-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
The numerical model, r.sim.terrain, simulates how overland flows of water and sediment shape topography over short periods of time. We tested the model by comparing runs of the simulation against a time series of airborne lidar surveys for our study landscape. Through these tests, we demonstrated that the model can simulate gully evolution including processes such as channel incision, channel widening, and the development of scour pits, rills, and depositional ridges.
Elena Shevnina and Andrey Silaev
Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 2767–2780, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-2767-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-2767-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
The paper provides a theory and assumptions behind an advance of frequency analysis (AFA) approach in long-term hydrological forecasting. In this paper, a new core of the probabilistic hydrological model MARkov Chain System (MARCSHYDRO) was introduced, together with the code and an example of a climate-scale prediction of an exceedance probability curve of river runoff with low computational costs.
Ting Sun and Sue Grimmond
Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 2781–2795, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-2781-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-2781-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
A Python-enhanced urban land surface model, SuPy (SUEWS in Python), is presented with its development (the SUEWS interface modification, F2PY configuration and Python frontend implementation), cross-platform deployment (PyPI, Python Package Index) and demonstration (online tutorials in Jupyter notebooks for users of different levels). SuPy represents a significant enhancement that supports existing and new model applications, reproducibility and enhanced functionality.
Stephan Thober, Matthias Cuntz, Matthias Kelbling, Rohini Kumar, Juliane Mai, and Luis Samaniego
Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 2501–2521, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-2501-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-2501-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
We present a model that aggregates simulated runoff along a river
(i.e. a routing model). The unique feature of the model is that it
can be run at multiple resolutions without any modifications to the
input data. The model internally (dis-)aggregates all input data to
the resolution given by the user. The model performance does not
depend on the chosen resolution. This allows efficient model
calibration at coarse resolution and subsequent model application at
fine resolution.
Wouter J. M. Knoben, Jim E. Freer, Keirnan J. A. Fowler, Murray C. Peel, and Ross A. Woods
Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 2463–2480, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-2463-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-2463-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
Computer models are used to predict river flows. A good model should represent the river basin to which it is applied so that flow predictions are as realistic as possible. However, many different computer models exist, and selecting the most appropriate model for a given river basin is not always easy. This study combines computer code for 46 different hydrological models into a single coding framework so that models can be compared in an objective way and we can learn about model differences.
Robert Reinecke, Laura Foglia, Steffen Mehl, Tim Trautmann, Denise Cáceres, and Petra Döll
Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 2401–2418, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-2401-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-2401-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
G³M is a new global groundwater model (http://globalgroundwatermodel.org) that simulates lateral and vertical flows as well as exchanges with surface water bodies like rivers, lakes, and wetlands for the whole globe except Antarctica and Greenland. The newly developed model framework enables an efficient integration into established global hydrological models. This paper presents the G³M concept and specific model design decisions together with first results under a naturalized equilibrium.
Gemma Coxon, Jim Freer, Rosanna Lane, Toby Dunne, Wouter J. M. Knoben, Nicholas J. K. Howden, Niall Quinn, Thorsten Wagener, and Ross Woods
Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 2285–2306, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-2285-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-2285-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
DECIPHeR (Dynamic fluxEs and ConnectIvity for Predictions of Hydrology) is a new modelling framework that can be applied from small catchment to continental scales for complex river basins. This paper describes the modelling framework and its key components and demonstrates the model’s ability to be applied across a large model domain. This work highlights the potential for catchment- to continental-scale predictions of streamflow to support robust environmental management and policy decisions.
Katherine R. Barnhart, Rachel C. Glade, Charles M. Shobe, and Gregory E. Tucker
Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 1267–1297, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-1267-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-1267-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
Terrainbento 1.0 is a Python package for modeling the evolution of the surface of the Earth over geologic time (e.g., thousands to millions of years). Despite many decades of effort by the geomorphology community, there is no one established governing equation for the evolution of topography. Terrainbento 1.0 thus provides 28 alternative models that support hypothesis testing and multi-model analysis in landscape evolution.
Taesam Lee and Vijay P. Singh
Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 1189–1207, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-1189-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-1189-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
A simple novel technique for simulating multisite occurrence of precipitation is proposed. The proposed technique employs the nonparametric approaches k-nearest neighbor and genetic algorithms. We tested this technique in various ways and proved that this simple technique can be useful and comparable to the existing one.
Alberto Martínez-de la Torre, Eleanor M. Blyth, and Graham P. Weedon
Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 765–784, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-765-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-765-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
Land–surface interactions with the atmosphere are key for weather and climate modelling studies, both in research and in the operational systems that provide scientific tools for decision makers. Regional assessments will be influenced by the characteristics of the land. We improved the representation of river flows in Great Britain by including a dependency on the terrain slope. This development will be reflected not only in river flows, but in the whole water cycle represented by the model.
Matthew R. Hipsey, Louise C. Bruce, Casper Boon, Brendan Busch, Cayelan C. Carey, David P. Hamilton, Paul C. Hanson, Jordan S. Read, Eduardo de Sousa, Michael Weber, and Luke A. Winslow
Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 473–523, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-473-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-473-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
The General Lake Model (GLM) has been developed to undertake simulation of a diverse range of wetlands, lakes, and reservoirs. The model supports the science needs of the Global Lake Ecological Observatory Network (GLEON), a network of lake sensors and researchers attempting to understand lake functioning and address questions about how lakes around the world vary in response to climate and land use change. The paper describes the science basis and application of the model.
Fanny Sarrazin, Andreas Hartmann, Francesca Pianosi, Rafael Rosolem, and Thorsten Wagener
Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 4933–4964, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-4933-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-4933-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
We propose the first large-scale vegetation–recharge model for karst regions (V2Karst), which enables the analysis of the impact of changes in climate and land cover on karst groundwater recharge. We demonstrate the plausibility of V2Karst simulations against observations at FLUXNET sites and of controlling modelled processes using sensitivity analysis. We perform virtual experiments to further test the model and gain insight into its sensitivity to precipitation pattern and vegetation cover.
G.-H. Crystal Ng, Andrew D. Wickert, Lauren D. Somers, Leila Saberi, Collin Cronkite-Ratcliff, Richard G. Niswonger, and Jeffrey M. McKenzie
Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 4755–4777, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-4755-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-4755-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
The profound importance of water has led to the development of increasingly complex hydrological models. However, implementing these models is usually time-consuming and requires specialized expertise, stymieing their widespread use to support science-driven decision-making. In response, we have developed GSFLOW–GRASS, a robust and comprehensive set of software tools that can be readily used to set up and execute GSFLOW, the U.S. Geological Survey's coupled groundwater–surface-water flow model.
Xenia Stavropulos-Laffaille, Katia Chancibault, Jean-Marc Brun, Aude Lemonsu, Valéry Masson, Aaron Boone, and Hervé Andrieu
Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 4175–4194, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-4175-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-4175-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
Integrating vegetation in urban planning is promoted to counter steer potential impacts of climate and demographic changes. Assessing the multiple benefits of such strategies on the urban microclimate requires a detailed coupling of both the water and energy transfers in numerical tools. In this respect, the representation of water-related processes in the urban subsoil of the existing model TEB-Veg has been improved. The new model thus allows a better evaluation of urban adaptation strategies.
Michael Bliss Singer, Katerina Michaelides, and Daniel E. J. Hobley
Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 3713–3726, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-3713-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-3713-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
For various applications, a regional or local characterization of rainfall is required, particularly at the watershed scale, where there is spatial heterogeneity. Furthermore, simple models are needed that can simulate various scenarios of climate change including changes in seasonal wetness and rainstorm intensity. To this end, we have developed the STOchastic Rainstorm Model (STORM). We explain its developments and data requirements, and illustrate how it simulates rainstorms over a basin.
Kristi R. Arsenault, Sujay V. Kumar, James V. Geiger, Shugong Wang, Eric Kemp, David M. Mocko, Hiroko Kato Beaudoing, Augusto Getirana, Mahdi Navari, Bailing Li, Jossy Jacob, Jerry Wegiel, and Christa D. Peters-Lidard
Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 3605–3621, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-3605-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-3605-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
The Earth’s land surface hydrology and physics can be represented in highly sophisticated models known as land surface models. The Land surface Data Toolkit (LDT) software was developed to meet these models’ input processing needs. LDT supports a variety of land surface and hydrology models and prepares the inputs (e.g., meteorological data, satellite observations to be assimilated into a model), which can be used for inter-model studies and to initialize weather and climate forecasts.
Joseph J. Hamman, Bart Nijssen, Theodore J. Bohn, Diana R. Gergel, and Yixin Mao
Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 3481–3496, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-3481-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-3481-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
Variable Infiltration Capacity (VIC) is a widely used hydrologic model. This paper documents the development of VIC version 5, which includes a reconfiguration of the model source code to support a wider range of modeling applications. It also represents a significant step forward for the VIC user community in terms of support for a range of modeling applications, reproducibility, and scientific robustness.
Rebecca Emerton, Ervin Zsoter, Louise Arnal, Hannah L. Cloke, Davide Muraro, Christel Prudhomme, Elisabeth M. Stephens, Peter Salamon, and Florian Pappenberger
Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 3327–3346, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-3327-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-3327-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
Global overviews of upcoming flood and drought events are key for many applications from agriculture to disaster risk reduction. Seasonal forecasts are designed to provide early indications of such events weeks or even months in advance. This paper introduces GloFAS-Seasonal, the first operational global-scale seasonal hydro-meteorological forecasting system producing openly available forecasts of high and low river flow out to 4 months ahead.
Sylvain Kuppel, Doerthe Tetzlaff, Marco P. Maneta, and Chris Soulsby
Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 3045–3069, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-3045-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-3045-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
This paper presents a novel ecohydrological model in which both the fluxes of water and the relative concentration in stable isotopes (2H and 18O) can be simulated. Spatial heterogeneity, lateral transfers and plant-driven water use are incorporated. A thorough evaluation shows encouraging results using a wide range of in situ measurements from a Scottish catchment. The same modelling principles are then used to simulate how (and where) precipitation ages as water transits in the catchment.
Ping Shen, Limin Zhang, Hongxin Chen, and Ruilin Fan
Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 2841–2856, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-2841-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-2841-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
A rainstorm can trigger numerous debris flows. A difficult task in debris flow risk assessment is to identify debris flow initiation locations and volumes. This paper presents a new model to solve this problem by physically simulating the initiation of debris flows by hillslope bed erosion and transformation from slope failures. The sediment from these two initiation mechanisms joins the flow mixture, and the volume of the flow mixture increases along the flow path due to additional bed erosion.
Edwin H. Sutanudjaja, Rens van Beek, Niko Wanders, Yoshihide Wada, Joyce H. C. Bosmans, Niels Drost, Ruud J. van der Ent, Inge E. M. de Graaf, Jannis M. Hoch, Kor de Jong, Derek Karssenberg, Patricia López López, Stefanie Peßenteiner, Oliver Schmitz, Menno W. Straatsma, Ekkamol Vannametee, Dominik Wisser, and Marc F. P. Bierkens
Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 2429–2453, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-2429-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-2429-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
PCR-GLOBWB 2 is an integrated hydrology and water resource model that fully integrates water use simulation and consolidates all features that have been developed since PCR-GLOBWB 1 was introduced. PCR-GLOBWB 2 can have a global coverage at 5 arcmin resolution and supersedes PCR-GLOBWB 1, which has a resolution of 30 arcmin only. Comparing the 5 arcmin with 30 arcmin simulations using discharge data, we clearly find improvement in the model performance of the higher-resolution model.
Marialaura Bancheri, Francesco Serafin, Michele Bottazzi, Wuletawu Abera, Giuseppe Formetta, and Riccardo Rigon
Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 2189–2207, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-2189-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-2189-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
This paper presents a new modeling package for the spatial interpolation of environmental variables. It includes 11 theoretical semivariogram models and four types of Kriging interpolations. To test the performances of the package, two applications are performed: the interpolation of 1 year of temperatures
and a rainfall event. Both interpolations gave good results. In comparison with gstat, the SIK package proved to be a good alternative, regarding both the easiness of use and the accuracy.
Benjamin Mewes and Andreas H. Schumann
Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 2175–2187, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-2175-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-2175-2018, 2018
Miao Jing, Falk Heße, Rohini Kumar, Wenqing Wang, Thomas Fischer, Marc Walther, Matthias Zink, Alraune Zech, Luis Samaniego, Olaf Kolditz, and Sabine Attinger
Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 1989–2007, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-1989-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-1989-2018, 2018
Paolo Benettin and Enrico Bertuzzo
Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 1627–1639, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-1627-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-1627-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
Solutes introduced in the environment are transported by water to streams and lakes. The tran-SAS package includes a set of codes to model this process for entire watersheds by using the concept of water residence times, i.e. the time that water takes to move through the landscape. Results show that the model is implemented efficiently and it can be used to simulate solute transport in a number of different conditions.
Léonard Santos, Guillaume Thirel, and Charles Perrin
Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 1591–1605, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-1591-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-1591-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
Many rainfall–runoff models are based on stores. However, the differential equations that describe the stores' evolution are rarely presented in literature.
This represents an issue when the temporal resolution changes. In this work, we propose and evaluate a state-space version of a simple rainfall–runoff model within a robust resolution scheme. The results show that the proposed model performs equally well or slightly better than the original one and is independent of the temporal resolution.
Yaling Liu, Mohamad Hejazi, Hongyi Li, Xuesong Zhang, and Guoyong Leng
Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 1077–1092, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-1077-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-1077-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
This hydrologic emulator provides researchers with an easy way to investigate the variations in water budgets at any spatial scale of interest, with minimum requirements of effort, reasonable model predictability, and appealing computational efficiency. We expect it to have a profound influence on scientific endeavors in hydrological modeling and to excite the immediate interest of researchers working on climate impact assessments, uncertainty/sensitivity analysis, and integrated assessment.
Gautam Bisht, William J. Riley, Haruko M. Wainwright, Baptiste Dafflon, Fengming Yuan, and Vladimir E. Romanovsky
Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 61–76, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-61-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-61-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
The land model integrated into the Energy Exascale Earth System Model was extended to include snow redistribution (SR) and lateral subsurface hydrologic and thermal processes. Simulation results at a polygonal tundra site near Barrow, Alaska, showed that inclusion of SR resulted in a better agreement with observations. Excluding lateral subsurface processes had a small impact on mean states but caused a large overestimation of spatial variability in soil moisture and temperature.
Chongyang Wang, Shuisen Chen, Dan Li, Danni Wang, Wei Liu, and Ji Yang
Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 4347–4365, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-4347-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-4347-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
Monitoring total suspended solids (TSS) concentration from satellites has unique advantages. Although many TSS retrieval models have been published, the general inversion method that is applicable to different field conditions is still under research. We studied many previous different satellite sensors models and finally developed a new model.
Jannis M. Hoch, Jeffrey C. Neal, Fedor Baart, Rens van Beek, Hessel C. Winsemius, Paul D. Bates, and Marc F. P. Bierkens
Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 3913–3929, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-3913-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-3913-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
To improve flood hazard assessments, it is vital to model all relevant processes. We here present GLOFRIM, a framework for coupling hydrologic and hydrodynamic models to increase the number of physical processes represented in hazard computations. GLOFRIM is openly available, versatile, and extensible with more models. Results also underpin its added value for model benchmarking, showing that not only model forcing but also grid properties and the numerical scheme influence output accuracy.
Adrien Gaudard, Robert Schwefel, Love Råman Vinnå, Martin Schmid, Alfred Wüest, and Damien Bouffard
Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 3411–3423, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-3411-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-3411-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
The study of lakes often uses numerical models to reproduce the processes occurring in nature as accurately as possible. Due to the complexity of natural systems, all numerical models need to leave aside or simplify many of the relevant processes. In this work, we improve the modelling of the impact of wind on the internal currents in deep lakes. This improves the reproduction of deep mixing, which influences the concentrations of oxygen and nutrients, with biological and chemical consequences.
Keyvan Malek, Claudio Stöckle, Kiran Chinnayakanahalli, Roger Nelson, Mingliang Liu, Kirti Rajagopalan, Muhammad Barik, and Jennifer C. Adam
Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 3059–3084, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-3059-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-3059-2017, 2017
Tobias Pilz, Till Francke, and Axel Bronstert
Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 3001–3023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-3001-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-3001-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
To discretise and transfer a landscape into a hydrological model, many different algorithms and software implementations exist. These are, however, often model specific, commercial, and allow for only a limited workflow automation. Overcoming these limitations, the software package lumpR was developed. It employs an hillslope-based discretisation algorithm directed at large-scale application. The software is demonstrated in a case study and crucial discretisation parameters are investigated.
Brecht Martens, Diego G. Miralles, Hans Lievens, Robin van der Schalie, Richard A. M. de Jeu, Diego Fernández-Prieto, Hylke E. Beck, Wouter A. Dorigo, and Niko E. C. Verhoest
Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 1903–1925, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-1903-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-1903-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
Terrestrial evaporation is a key component of the hydrological cycle and reliable data sets of this variable are of major importance. The Global Land Evaporation Amsterdam Model (GLEAM, www.GLEAM.eu) is a set of algorithms which estimates evaporation based on satellite observations. The third version of GLEAM, presented in this study, includes an improved parameterization of different model components. As a result, the accuracy of the GLEAM data sets has been improved upon previous versions.
Laurent Guillaume Courty, Adrián Pedrozo-Acuña, and Paul David Bates
Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 1835–1847, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-1835-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-1835-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
This paper presents Itzï, a new free software for the simulation of floods. It is integrated with a geographic information system (GIS), which reduces the human time necessary for preparing the entry data and analysing the results of the simulation.
Itzï uses a simplified numerical scheme that permits to obtain results faster than with other types of models using more complex equations.
In this article, Itzï is tested with three cases that show its suitability to simulate urban floods.
Jordan M. Adams, Nicole M. Gasparini, Daniel E. J. Hobley, Gregory E. Tucker, Eric W. H. Hutton, Sai S. Nudurupati, and Erkan Istanbulluoglu
Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 1645–1663, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-1645-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-1645-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
OverlandFlow is a 2-dimensional hydrology component contained within the Landlab modeling framework. It can be applied in both hydrology and geomorphology applications across real and synthetic landscape grids, for both short- and long-term events. This paper finds that this non-steady hydrology regime produces different landscape characteristics when compared to more traditional steady-state hydrology and geomorphology models, suggesting that hydrology regime can impact resulting morphologies.
Xiangyu Luo, Hong-Yi Li, L. Ruby Leung, Teklu K. Tesfa, Augusto Getirana, Fabrice Papa, and Laura L. Hess
Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 1233–1259, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-1233-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-1233-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
This study shows that alleviating vegetation-caused biases in DEM data, refining channel cross-sectional geometry and Manning roughness coefficients, as well as accounting for backwater effects can effectively improve the modeling of streamflow, river stages and flood extent in the Amazon Basin. The obtained understanding could be helpful to hydrological modeling in basins with evident inundation, which has important implications for improving land–atmosphere interactions in Earth system models.
Martin Mergili, Jan-Thomas Fischer, Julia Krenn, and Shiva P. Pudasaini
Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 553–569, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-553-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-553-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
r.avaflow represents a GIS-based, multi-functional open-source tool for the simulation of debris flows, rock avalanches, snow avalanches, or two-phase (solid and fluid) process chains. It further facilitates parameter studies and validation of the simulation results against observed patterns. r.avaflow shall inform strategies to reduce the risks related to the interaction of mass flow processes with society.
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.
Bennett, N. D., Croke, B. F. W., Guariso, G., Guillaume, J. H. A., Hamilton,
S. H., Jakeman, A. J., Marsili-Libelli, S., Newham, L. T. H., Norton, J. P.,
Perrin, C., Pierce, S. A., Robson, B., Seppelt, R., Voinov, A. A., Fath, B.
D., and Andreassian, V.: Characterising performance of environmental models,
Environ. Model. Softw., 40, 1–20, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2012.09.011, 2013.
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.
Corbari, C. and Mancini, M.: Calibration and Validation of a Distributed
Energy–Water Balance Model Using Satellite Data of Land Surface Temperature
and Ground Discharge Measurements, J. Hydrometeorol., 15, 376–392,
https://doi.org/10.1175/JHM-D-12-0173.1, 2014.
Cuntz, M., Mai, J., Zink, M., Thober, S., Kumar, R., Schäfer, D.,
Schrön, M., Craven, J., Rakovec, O., Spieler, D., Prykhodko, V.,
Dalmasso, G., Musuuza, J., Langenberg, B., Attinger, S., and Samaniego, L.:
Computationally inexpensive identification of noninformative model parameters
by sequential screening, Water Resour. Res., 51, 6417–6441,
https://doi.org/10.1002/2015WR016907, 2015.
Dawson, C. W., Abrahart, R. J., and See, L. M.: HydroTest: A web-based
toolbox of evaluation metrics for the standardised assessment of hydrological
forecasts, Environ. Modell. Softw., 22, 1034–1052,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2006.06.008, 2007.
Demirel, M. C., Mai, J., Mendiguren, G., Koch, J., Samaniego, L., and Stisen,
S.: Combining satellite data and appropriate objective functions for improved
spatial pattern performance of a distributed hydrologic model, Hydrol. Earth
Syst. Sci., 22, 1299–1315, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-1299-2018, 2018a.
Demirel, M. C., Stisen, S., and Koch, J.: SPAEF: SPAtial EFficiency,
https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.1158890, 2018b.
Doherty, J.: PEST: Model Independent Parameter Estimation. Fifth Edition of
User Manual, Watermark Numerical Computing, Brisbane, 2005.
Dorninger, M., Mittermaier, M. P., Gilleland, E., Ebert, E. E., Brown, B.
G., and Wilson, L. J.: MesoVICT: Mesoscale Verification Inter-Comparison over Complex Terrain. NCAR Technical Note NCAR/TN-505+STR, 23 pp., https://doi.org/10.5065/D6416V21, 2013.
Duan, Q. Y., Gupta, V. K., and Sorooshian, S.: Shuffled complex evolution
approach for effective and efficient global minimization, J. Optimiz. Theory
App., 76, 501–521, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00939380, 1993.
Gilleland, E., Ahijevych, D., Brown, B. G., Casati, B., and Ebert, E. E.:
Intercomparison of Spatial Forecast Verification Methods, Weather Forecast.,
24, 1416–1430, 2009.
Gilleland, E., Bukovsky, M., Williams, C. L., McGinnis, S., Ammann, C. M.,
Brown, B. G., and Mearns, L. O.: Evaluating NARCCAP model performance for
frequencies of severe-storm environments, Adv. Stat. Clim. Meteorol.
Oceanogr., 2, 137–153, https://doi.org/10.5194/ascmo-2-137-2016, 2016.
Glaser, B., Klaus, J., Frei, S., Frentress, J., Pfister, L., and Hopp, L.: On
the value of surface saturated area dynamics mapped with thermal infrared
imagery for modeling the hillslope-riparian-stream continuum, Water Resour.
Res., 52, 8317–8342, https://doi.org/10.1002/2015WR018414, 2016.
Grayson, R. and Blöschl, G.: Spatial patterns in catchment hydrology:
observations and modelling, Cambridge University Press, 2001.
Grayson, R. B., Blöschl, G., Western, A. W., and McMahon, T. A.: Advances
in the use of observed spatial patterns of catchment hydrological response,
Adv. Water Resour., 25, 1313–1334, https://doi.org/10.1016/s0309-1708(02)00060-x, 2002.
Gupta, H. V., Wagener, T., and Liu, Y. Q.: Reconciling theory with
observations: elements of a diagnostic approach to model evaluation, Hydrol.
Process., 22, 3802–3813, https://doi.org/10.1002/Hyp.6989, 2008.
Gupta, H. V., Clark, M. P., Vrugt, J. A., Abramowitz, G., and Ye, M.: Towards
a comprehensive assessment of model structural adequacy, Water Resour. Res.,
48, W08301,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2011WR011044, 2012.
Hagen, A.: Fuzzy set approach to assessing similarity of categorical maps,
Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci., 17, 235–249, https://doi.org/10.1080/13658810210157822, 2003.
Hagen, A. and Martens, P.: Map comparison methods for comprehensive assessment
of geosimulation models, International Conference on Computational
Science and Its Applications, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2008.
Herrera-Estrada, J. E., Satoh, Y., and Sheffield, J.: Spatiotemporal dynamics
of global drought, Geophys. Res. Lett., 44, 2254–2263,
https://doi.org/10.1002/2016GL071768, 2017.
Hovadik, J. M. and Larue, D. K.: Static characterizations of reservoirs:
refining the concepts of connectivity and continuity, Petrol. Geosci., 13,
195–211, 2007.
Immerzeel, W. W. and Droogers, P.: Calibration of a distributed hydrological
model based on satellite evapotranspiration, J. Hydrol., 349, 411–424,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2007.11.017, 2008.
Jensen, K. H. and Illangasekare, T. H.: HOBE: A Hydrological Observatory,
Vadose Zone J., 10, 1–7, https://doi.org/10.2136/vzj2011.0006, 2011.
Kling, H. and Gupta, H.: On the development of regionalization relationships
for lumped watershed models: The impact of ignoring sub-basin scale
variability, J. Hydrol., 373, 337–351, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2009.04.031,
2009.
Kling, H., Fuchs, M., and Paulin, M.: Runoff conditions in the upper Danube
basin under an ensemble of climate change scenarios, J. Hydrol., 424–425,
264–277, https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JHYDROL.2012.01.011, 2012.
Koch, J.: SEEM: Spatial Evaluation of Environmental Models,
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1154614, 2018.
Koch, J. and Stisen, S.: Citizen science: A new perspective to advance
spatial pattern evaluation in hydrology, PLoS One, 12, 1–20,
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0178165, 2017.
Koch, J., He, X., Jensen, K. H., and Refsgaard, J. C.: Challenges in
conditioning a stochastic geological model of a heterogeneous glacial aquifer
to a comprehensive soft data set, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 18, 2907–2923,
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-18-2907-2014, 2014.
Koch, J., Jensen, K. H., and Stisen, S.: Toward a true spatial model
evaluation in distributed hydrological modeling: Kappa statistics, Fuzzy
theory, and EOF-analysis benchmarked by the human perception and evaluated
against a modeling case study, Water Resour. Res., 51, 1225–1246,
https://doi.org/10.1002/2014WR016607, 2015.
Koch, J., Cornelissen, T., Fang, Z., Bogena, H., Diekkrüger, B., Kollet,
S., and Stisen, S.: Inter-comparison of three distributed hydrological models
with respect to seasonal variability of soil moisture patterns at a small
forested catchment, J. Hydrol., 533, 234–249,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.12.002, 2016a.
Koch, J., Siemann, A., Stisen, S., and Sheffield, J.: Spatial validation of
large scale land surface models against monthly land surface temperature
patterns using innovative performance metrics, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 121,
5430–5452, https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JD024482, 2016b.
Koch, J., Mendiguren, G., Mariethoz, G., and Stisen, S.: Spatial sensitivity
analysis of simulated land-surface patterns in a catchment model using a set
of innovative spatial performance metrics, J. Hydrometeorol., 18, 1121–1142,
JHM-D-16-0148.1, https://doi.org/10.1175/JHM-D-16-0148.1, 2017.
Krause, P., Boyle, D. P., and Bäse, F.: Comparison of different efficiency criteria for hydrological model assessment, Adv. Geosci., 5, 89–97, https://doi.org/10.5194/adgeo-5-89-2005, 2005.
Kuhnert, M., Voinov, A., and Seppelt, R.: Comparing raster map comparison
algorithms for spatial modeling and analysis, Photogramm. Eng. Remote
Sensing, 71, 975–984, 2005.
Kumar, R., Samaniego, L., and Attinger, S.: The effects of spatial
discretization and model parameterization on the prediction of extreme runoff
characteristics, J. Hydrol., 392, 54–69, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2010.07.047,
2010.
Kumar, R., Samaniego, L., and Attinger, S.: Implications of distributed
hydrologic model parameterization on water fluxes at multiple scales and
locations, Water Resour. Res., 49, 360–379, https://doi.org/10.1029/2012WR012195, 2013.
Kumar, S. V., Peters-Lidard, C. D., Santanello, J., Harrison, K., Liu, Y.,
and Shaw, M.: Land surface Verification Toolkit (LVT) – a generalized
framework for land surface model evaluation, Geosci. Model Dev., 5, 869–886,
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-5-869-2012, 2012.
McCabe, M. F., Wood, E. F., Wjcik, R., Pan, M., Sheffield, J., Gao, H., and
Su, H.: Hydrological consistency using multi-sensor remote sensing data for
water and energy cycle studies, Remote Sens. Environ., 112, 430–444,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2007.03.027, 2008.
McCabe, M. F., Rodell, M., Alsdorf, D. E., Miralles, D. G., Uijlenhoet, R.,
Wagner, W., Lucieer, A., Houborg, R., Verhoest, N. E. C., Franz, T. E., Shi,
J., Gao, H., and Wood, E. F.: The future of Earth observation in hydrology,
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 3879–3914,
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-3879-2017, 2017.
Mendiguren, G., Koch, J., and Stisen, S.: Spatial pattern evaluation of a
calibrated national hydrological model – a remote-sensing-based diagnostic
approach, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 5987–6005,
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-5987-2017, 2017.
Mendoza, P. A., Clark, M. P., Barlage, M., Rajagopalan, B., Samaniego, L.,
Abramowitz, G., and Gupta, H.: Are we unnecessarily constraining the agility
of complex process-based models?, Water Resour. Res., 51, 716–728,
https://doi.org/10.1002/2014WR015820, 2015.
Mittermaier, M., Roberts, N. and Thompson, S. A.: A long-term assessment of
precipitation forecast skill using the Fractions Skill Score, Meteorol.
Appl., 20, 176–186, https://doi.org/10.1002/met.296, 2013.
Mizukami, N., Clark, M. P., Newman, A. J., Wood, A. W., Gutmann, E. D.,
Nijssen, B., Rakovec, O,. and Samaniego, L.: Towards seamless large-domain
parameter estimation for hydrologic models, Water Resour. Res., 53,
8020–8040, https://doi.org/10.1002/2017WR020401, 2017.
Moriasi, D. N., Arnold, J. G., Van Liew, M. W., Bingner, R. L., Harmel, R. D., and
Veith, T. L.: Model Evaluation Guidelines for Systematic Quantification of
Accuracy in Watershed Simulations, T. ASABE, 50, 885–900,
https://doi.org/10.13031/2013.23153, 2007.
Norman, J. M., Kustas, W. P., and Humes, K. S.: Source approach for
estimating soil and vegetation energy fluxes in observations of directional
radiometric surface temperature, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 77, 263–293,
https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-1923(95)02265-Y, 1995.
Orth, R., Dutra, E., Trigo, I. F., and Balsamo, G.: Advancing land surface
model development with satellite-based Earth observations, Hydrol. Earth
Syst. Sci., 21, 2483–2495, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-2483-2017, 2017.
Pokhrel, P. and Gupta, H. V.: On the ability to infer spatial catchment
variability using streamflow hydrographs, Water Resour. Res., 47, W08534,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2010wr009873, 2011.
Refsgaard, J. C. and Henriksen, H. J.: Modelling guidelines – Terminology
and guiding principles, Adv. Water Resour., 27, 71–82,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2003.08.006, 2004.
Refsgaard, J. C., Auken, E., Bamberg, C. A., Christensen, B. S. B., Clausen,
T., Dalgaard, E., Effersø, F., Ernstsen, V., Gertz, F., Hansen, A. L., He,
X., Jacobsen, B. H., Jensen, K. H., Jørgensen, F., Jørgensen, L. F.,
Koch, J., Nilsson, B., Petersen, C., De Schepper, G., Schamper, C.,
Sørensen, K. I., Therrien, R., Thirup, C., and Viezzoli, A.: Nitrate
reduction in geologically heterogeneous catchments – A framework for
assessing the scale of predictive capability of hydrological models, Sci.
Total Environ., 468–469, 1278–1288, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2013.07.042,
2014.
Renard, P. and Allard, D.: Connectivity metrics for subsurface flow and
transport, Adv. Water Resour., 51, 168–196,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2011.12.001, 2013.
Roberts, N.: Assessing the spatial and temporal variation in the skill of
precipitation forecasts from an NWP model, Meteorol. Appl., 15, 163–169,
2008.
Roberts, N. M. and Lean, H. W.: Scale-Selective Verification of Rainfall
Accumulations from High-Resolution Forecasts of Convective Events, Mon.
Weather Rev., 136, 78–97, https://doi.org/10.1175/2007MWR2123.1, 2008.
Rongier, G., Collon, P., Renard, P., Straubhaar, J., and Sausse, J.:
Comparing connected structures in ensemble of random fields, Adv. Water
Resour., 96, 145–169, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2016.07.008, 2016.
Ruiz-Pérez, G., González-Sanchis, M., Del Campo, A. D., and
Francés, F.: Can a parsimonious model implemented with satellite data be
used for modelling the vegetation dynamics and water cycle in
water-controlled environments?, Ecol. Modell., 324, 45–53,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2016.01.002, 2016.
Samaniego, L., Kumar, R., and Attinger, S.: Multiscale parameter
regionalization of a grid-based hydrologic model at the mesoscale, Water
Resour. Res., 46, W05523,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2008wr007327, 2010a.
Samaniego, L., Bardossy, A., and Kumar, R.: Streamflow prediction in ungauged
catchments using copula-based dissimilarity measures, Water Resour. Res., 46,
W02506,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2008WR007695, 2010b.
Samaniego, L., Kumar, R., Mai, J., Zink, M., Thober, S., Cuntz, M., Rakovec,
O., Schäfer, D., Schrön, M., Brenner, J., Demirel, C. M., Kaluza, M.,
Langenberg, B., Stisen, S., and Attinger, S.: mesoscale Hydrologic Model,
https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.1069203, 2017a.
Samaniego, L., Kumar, R., Thober, S., Rakovec, O., Zink, M., Wanders, N.,
Eisner, S., Müller Schmied, H., Sutanudjaja, E. H., Warrach-Sagi, K., and
Attinger, S.: Toward seamless hydrologic predictions across spatial scales,
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 4323–4346,
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-4323-2017, 2017b.
Schaefi, B. and Gupta, H. V.: Do Nash values have value?, Hydrol. Process.,
21, 2075–2080, 2007.
Schalge, B., Rihani, J., Baroni, G., Erdal, D., Geppert, G., Haefliger, V.,
Haese, B., Saavedra, P., Neuweiler, I., Hendricks Franssen, H.-J., Ament, F.,
Attinger, S., Cirpka, O. A., Kollet, S., Kunstmann, H., Vereecken, H., and
Simmer, C.: High-Resolution Virtual Catchment Simulations of the
Subsurface-Land Surface-Atmosphere System, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. Discuss.,
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2016-557, 2016.
Schuurmans, J. M., van Geer, F. C., and Bierkens, M. F. P.: Remotely sensed
latent heat fluxes for model error diagnosis: a case study, Hydrol. Earth
Syst. Sci., 15, 759–769, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-15-759-2011, 2011.
Stisen, S., McCabe, M. F., Refsgaard, J. C., Lerer, S., and Butts, M. B.:
Model parameter analysis using remotely sensed pattern information in a
multi-constraint framework, J. Hydrol., 409, 337–349,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2011.08.030, 2011.
Stisen, S., Sonnenborg, T. O., Refsgaard, J. C., Koch, J., Bircher, S., and
Jensen, K. H.: Moving beyond runoff calibration – Multi-constraint
optimization of a surface-subsurface-atmosphere model, Hydrol. Process.,
in revision, 2018.
Swain, M. J. and Ballard, D. H.: Color indexing, Int. J. Comput. Vis., 7,
11–32, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00130487, 1991.
Terink, W., Lutz, A. F., Simons, G. W. H., Immerzeel, W. W., and Droogers, P.: SPHY v2.0: Spatial Processes in HYdrology, Geosci. Model Dev., 8, 2009–2034, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-2009-2015, 2015.
van Griensven, A., Meixner, T., Grunwald, S., Bishop, T., Diluzio, M., and
Srinivasan, R.: A global sensitivity analysis tool for the parameters of
multi-variable catchment models, J. Hydrol., 324, 10–23,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2005.09.008, 2006.
Vereecken, H., Pachepsky, Y., Simmer, C., Rihani, J., Kunoth, A., Korres,
W., Graf, A., Franssen, H. J.-H., Thiele-Eich, I., and Shao, Y.: On the role
of patterns in understanding the functioning of soil-vegetation-atmosphere
systems, J. Hydrol., 542, 63–86, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2016.08.053, 2016.
Wealands, S. R., Grayson, R. B., and Walker, J. P.: Quantitative comparison
of spatial fields for hydrological model assessment – some promising
approaches, Adv. Water Resour., 28, 15–32,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2004.10.001, 2005.
Western, A. W., Blöschl, G., and Grayson, R. B.: Toward capturing
hydrologically significant connectivity in spatial patterns, Water Resour.
Res., 37, 83–97, 2001.
Wolff, J. K., Harrold, M., Fowler, T., Gotway, J. H., Nance, L., and Brown,
B. G.: Beyond the Basics: Evaluating Model-Based Precipitation Forecasts
Using Traditional, Spatial, and Object-Based Methods, Weather Forecast., 29,
1451–1472, https://doi.org/10.1175/WAF-D-13-00135.1, 2014.
Search articles
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.
Our work addresses a key challenge in earth system modelling: how to optimally exploit the...
Geoscientific Model Development
An interactive open-access journal of the European Geosciences Union
All site content, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.