Articles | Volume 14, issue 2
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-821-2021
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-821-2021
Model description paper
 | 
05 Feb 2021
Model description paper |  | 05 Feb 2021

Shyft v4.8: a framework for uncertainty assessment and distributed hydrologic modeling for operational hydrology

John F. Burkhart, Felix N. Matt, Sigbjørn Helset, Yisak Sultan Abdella, Ola Skavhaug, and Olga Silantyeva

Related authors

Coupled machine learning and the limits of acceptability approach applied in parameter identification for a distributed hydrological model
Aynom T. Teweldebrhan, Thomas V. Schuler, John F. Burkhart, and Morten Hjorth-Jensen
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 4641–4658, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-24-4641-2020,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-24-4641-2020, 2020
The Lagrangian particle dispersion model FLEXPART version 10.4
Ignacio Pisso, Espen Sollum, Henrik Grythe, Nina I. Kristiansen, Massimo Cassiani, Sabine Eckhardt, Delia Arnold, Don Morton, Rona L. Thompson, Christine D. Groot Zwaaftink, Nikolaos Evangeliou, Harald Sodemann, Leopold Haimberger, Stephan Henne, Dominik Brunner, John F. Burkhart, Anne Fouilloux, Jerome Brioude, Anne Philipp, Petra Seibert, and Andreas Stohl
Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 4955–4997, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-4955-2019,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-4955-2019, 2019
Short summary
Simulations of black carbon (BC) aerosol impact over Hindu Kush Himalayan sites: validation, sources, and implications on glacier runoff
Sauvik Santra, Shubha Verma, Koji Fujita, Indrajit Chakraborty, Olivier Boucher, Toshihiko Takemura, John F. Burkhart, Felix Matt, and Mukesh Sharma
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 2441–2460, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-2441-2019,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-2441-2019, 2019
Short summary
Parameter uncertainty analysis for an operational hydrological model using residual-based and limits of acceptability approaches
Aynom T. Teweldebrhan, John F. Burkhart, and Thomas V. Schuler
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 5021–5039, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-5021-2018,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-5021-2018, 2018
Modelling hydrologic impacts of light absorbing aerosol deposition on snow at the catchment scale
Felix N. Matt, John F. Burkhart, and Joni-Pekka Pietikäinen
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 179–201, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-179-2018,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-179-2018, 2018
Short summary

Related subject area

Hydrology
HGS-PDAF (version 1.0): a modular data assimilation framework for an integrated surface and subsurface hydrological model
Qi Tang, Hugo Delottier, Wolfgang Kurtz, Lars Nerger, Oliver S. Schilling, and Philip Brunner
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 3559–3578, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3559-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3559-2024, 2024
Short summary
Wflow_sbm v0.7.3, a spatially distributed hydrological model: from global data to local applications
Willem J. van Verseveld, Albrecht H. Weerts, Martijn Visser, Joost Buitink, Ruben O. Imhoff, Hélène Boisgontier, Laurène Bouaziz, Dirk Eilander, Mark Hegnauer, Corine ten Velden, and Bobby Russell
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 3199–3234, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3199-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3199-2024, 2024
Short summary
Reservoir Assessment Tool version 3.0: a scalable and user-friendly software platform to mobilize the global water management community
Sanchit Minocha, Faisal Hossain, Pritam Das, Sarath Suresh, Shahzaib Khan, George Darkwah, Hyongki Lee, Stefano Galelli, Konstantinos Andreadis, and Perry Oddo
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 3137–3156, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3137-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3137-2024, 2024
Short summary
HydroFATE (v1): a high-resolution contaminant fate model for the global river system
Heloisa Ehalt Macedo, Bernhard Lehner, Jim Nicell, and Günther Grill
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 2877–2899, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2877-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2877-2024, 2024
Short summary
Validation of a new global irrigation scheme in the land surface model ORCHIDEE v2.2
Pedro Felipe Arboleda-Obando, Agnès Ducharne, Zun Yin, and Philippe Ciais
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 2141–2164, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2141-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2141-2024, 2024
Short summary

Cited articles

Abramowitz, G.: Towards a public, standardized, diagnostic benchmarking system for land surface models, Geosci. Model Dev., 5, 819–827, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-5-819-2012, 2012. a
Albrecht, B. A.: Aerosols, Cloud Microphysics, and Fractional Cloudiness, Science, 245, 1227–1230, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.245.4923.1227, 1989. a
Andersson, E. and Thépaut, J.: ECMWF's 4D-Var data assimilation system – the genesis and ten years in operations, ECMWF Newslett., 115, 8–12, https://doi.org/10.21957/wnmguimihe, 2008. a
Anghileri, D., Voisin, N., Castelletti, A., Pianosi, F., Nijssen, B., and Lettenmaier, D. P.: Value of long-term streamflow forecasts to reservoir operations for water supply in snow-dominated river catchments, Water Resour. Res., 52, 4209–4225, https://doi.org/10.1002/2015WR017864, 2016. a, b
Anghileri, D., Monhart, S., Zhou, C., Bogner, K., Castelletti, A., Burlando, P., and Zappa, M.: The Value of Subseasonal Hydrometeorological Forecasts to Hydropower Operations: How Much Does Preprocessing Matter?, Water Resour. Res., 55, 10, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019WR025280, 2019. a, b, c
Download
Short summary
We present a new hydrologic modeling framework for interactive development of inflow forecasts for hydropower production planning and other operational environments (e.g., flood forecasting). The software provides a Python user interface with an application programming interface (API) for a computationally optimized C++ model engine, giving end users extensive control over the model configuration in real time during a simulation. This provides for extensive experimentation with configuration.